Turner v. United States Capitol Police Board

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that because the identified harm did not constitute an adverse employment action, plaintiff could not “base a discrimination claim on it”
• explaining that a “meets expectations” evaluation could not constitute an adverse employment action in the retaliation context where no facts were pled showing how it would impact bonus, promotion, or pay decisions or how it would impact professional opportunities
• the plaintiff’s supervisor’s “attempt” to negatively affect the plaintiff’s job performance rating, which did not cause the plaintiff any financial harm or loss of professional opportunities, was not an adverse employment action
• plaintiff failed to allege necessary facts

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).