Tanya Cooper-Schut v. Visteon Automotive Systems

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “an employer may be liable if a supervisor is responsible for the harassment’
• finding that the district court correctly allowed an out-of-court hearsay statement into evidence for the limited purpose of the effect that it had on its listener
• noting that the employee quit before her employer could investigate her discrimination complaint and finding that “an employee has not acted reasonably if she assumes the employer will fail to protect her without allowing the employer a chance to try.”
• finding the district court correctly treated evidence that another employee told the plaintiff a competition existed among employees to see who would have sex with the plaintiff first as hearsay “and only let it in for the effect that it had on its listener”
• a plaintiff must demonstrate that he or she was subject to unwelcome harassment for a Title VII hostile work environment claim
• no liability where employee “did not report that she believed [co-worker conflicts] to be racially or sexually motivated.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).