Susan McKENZIE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Defendant-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a plaintiff may bring suit on a retaliation claim not included in his administrative charge “where the alleged retaliation arose after the charge of discrimination had been filed”
• stating that an employer’s attempt to interfere with the plaintiffs prosecution of her discrimination case is better addressed through court rules, not through a separate retaliation suit
• holding that Plaintiff did not need to file an EEO complaint for retaliation based on a previous EEO complaint even though the original EEO complaint was against one employee and the alleged retaliation included actions by other employees
• holding that plaintiff's “own recitation” of events involving her co-workers could not be considered on a motion for summary judgment, where plaintiff “did not depose the co-workers . . . or otherwise secure admissible evidence to support these incidents”
• finding that three “sexually suggestive” comments by a co-worker did not “unreasonably interfere [ ]” with the plaintiff’s working environment
• stating that claim based on retaliation for filing EEOC complaint must have a “reasonable relationship” to the initial EEOC complaint and concluding that such relationship existed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).