Senno v. Elmsford Union Free School District

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that employees were similarly situated though it was “undisputed” one was higher-ranked
• stating that imposition of Section 3020- a charges was an adverse employment action for Title VII retaliation claim
• finding that the initiation of disciplinary charges that resulted in suspension more than one year later constituted an adverse action under Title VII’s retaliation provision
• finding that the plaintiff had abandoned a Title VII claim based on a failure to address it in a response to a motion to dismiss
• finding that “the preconditions for Plaintiff’s retaliation claim have been met” for exhaustion purposes where the complaint “alleges retaliation for the filing of the EEOC charge”
• following Graham's instruction to ignore defendant’s evidence that undercut plaintiff’s prima facie case

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).