Single Slur Can Establish Workplace Harassment, 3rd Circuit Rules
A single racial slur in the workplace may be enough to establish a lawsuit for harassment, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled today.Clarifying…
July 14, 2017 at 03:09 PM
2 minute read
A single racial slur in the workplace may be enough to establish a lawsuit for harassment, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled today.
Clarifying muddled precedent about what needs to be alleged for workplace discrimination claims to survive the pleadings stage, a three-judge panel of the circuit determined plaintiffs need to show that harassment is “severe or pervasive,” rather than “severe and pervasive.” The decision in Castleberry v. STI Group reversed a ruling from the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, which had dismissed the claims.
The two African American plaintiffs in the case, Atron Castleberry and John Brown, brought harassment, discrimination and retaliation claims after they were terminated for reporting to supervisors that they had been told they would be fired if they “nigger-rigged” a fence they had been instructed to remove. Castleberry and Brown had been general laborers on a pipeline project for Chesapeake Energy Corp., and were working for the staffing agency and subcontractor on the project, STI Group.
The defendants had sought to block the case early in the litigation, arguing that no courts found that a single, isolated incident could constitute a hostile work environment, but, noting some conflicting case law on the issue, Judge Thomas Ambro, said the defendants' arguments “miss the point.”
“The Supreme Court's decision to adopt the 'severe or pervasive' standard-thereby abandoning a 'regular' requirement-lends support that an isolated incident of discrimination (if severe) can suffice to state a claim for harassment,” Amrbo said. “Otherwise why create a disjunctive standard where alleged 'severe' conduct-even if not at all 'pervasive'-can establish a plaintiff's harassment clam?”
Daniel Horowitz of Swartz Swidler represents the plaintiffs, Terri Patak of Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote represents STI Group, and Donna Walsh of Myers Brier & Kelly represents Chesapeake Energy Corp.. Each attorney did not immediately return a call for comment.
This story is developing.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGuiding LGBTQ+ Clients on Safeguarding Their Rights and Protections in Uncertain Political Climates
6 minute readBuchanan, McNees Wallace Escape Abuse of Process Suit Over School Athletics Dispute
4 minute readConduct Board Urges 'Swift and Severe Punishment' for Phila. Judge's Facebook Posts
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 2Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 3Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 4X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
- 5Monsanto Wins Latest Philadelphia Roundup Trial
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250