class actions, disabled rights, copyright, attorneys general, online speech, law schools, obesity, New York, mortgages, legal blogs, safety, CPSC, pharmaceuticals, patent trolls, ADA filing mills, international human rights, humor, hate speech, illegal drugs, immigration law, cellphones, international law, real estate, bar associations, Environmental Protection Agency, First Amendment, insurance fraud, slip and fall, smoking bans, emergency medicine, regulation and its reform, dramshop statutes, hotels, web accessibility, United Nations, Alien Tort Claims Act, lobbyists, pools, school discipline, Voting Rights Act, legal services programs
   
   
 
   

FORUM

« The nullification crisis of 2004? | Illinois Supreme Court lowers appeal bond requirement »

June 16, 2004


Pennsylvania State Police v. Suders

The Supreme Court, with near-unanimity (Thomas dissenting), has decided a case involving claims in which sexual harassment law intersects with the law of "constructive discharge" -- that is to say, where complainants weren't fired but say they had to quit because the environment at work was so hostile. George Lenard analyzes the case and discusses press reaction (Jun. 14 and Jun. 15) and Michael Fox also comments (opinions courtesy Findlaw).

Posted by Walter Olson at 12:29 PM | TrackBack (0)



categories:
Employment Law









 

 

Published by the Manhattan Institute

The Manhattan Insitute's Center for Legal Policy.