skip navigation
search

Search the opinions of the US Supreme Court

Search for:
All decisions
Only decisions since 1991
Only summaries of decisions
Only historic decisions
use and, or, not -- and is default
* acts as wildcard, phrases in "double quotes"

Your query harassment returned 29 results.

1000 DAVIS V. MONROE COUNTY BD. OF ED.
[Syllabus]
835 FARAGHER V. CITY OF BOCA RATON, 524 U.S. 775 (1998)
[Syllabus]
835 FARAGHER V. CITY OF BOCA RATON, 524 U.S. 775 (1998)
[Syllabus]
800 PENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE V. SUDERS
[Syllabus]
When a hostile work environment created by a supervisor culminates in a constructive discharge, may the employer assert an affirmative defense?
760 BURLINGTON INDUSTRIES, INC. V. ELLERTH, 524 U.S. 742 (1998)
[Syllabus]
560 GEBSER V. LAGO VISTA INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST., 524 U.S. 274 (1998)
[Syllabus]
517 ONCALE V. SUNDOWNER OFFSHORE SERVICES, INC., 523 U.S. 75 (1998)
[Syllabus]
315 DOE V. REED
[Syllabus]
315 CITIZENS UNITED V. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMN
[Syllabus]
315 SCHENCK V. PRO CHOICE NETWORK, 519 U.S. 357 (1997).
[Syllabus]
315
[Syllabus]
315 SORRELL V. IMS HEALTH INC.
[Syllabus]
315 JACKSON V. BIRMINGHAM BD. OF ED.
[Syllabus]
315 PORTER V. NUSSLE
[Syllabus]
The Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995's exhaustion-of-administrative-remedies requirement applies to all inmate suits about prison life, whether they involve general circumstances or particular episodes, and whether they allege corrections officers' use of excessive force or some other wrong.
315 POLLARD V. E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS & CO.
[Syllabus]
Front pay is not an element of compensatory damages under 42 U. S. C. §1981a and thus is not subject to the damages cap imposed by §1981a(b)(3).
199 CRAWFORD V. METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT OFNASHVILLE AND DAVIDSON CTY.
[Syllabus]
199 NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATIONV. MORGAN
[Syllabus]
A plaintiff raising claims of discrete discriminatory or retaliatory acts under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 must file his charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission within the appropriate 180- or 300-day statutory filing period, but a charge alleging a hostile work environment will not be time barred if all acts constituting the claim are part of the same unlawful practice and at least one act falls within the filing period; in neither instance is a court precluded from applying equitable doctrines that may toll or limit the time period.
199
[Syllabus]
199 WILKIE V. ROBBINS
[Syllabus]
199
[Syllabus]
199 BURLINGTON N. & S. F.R.CO. V. WHITE
[Syllabus]
199
[Syllabus]
199 FITZGERALD V. BARNSTABLE SCHOOL COMM.
[Syllabus]
199 JONES V. R. R. DONNELLEY & SONS CO.
[Syllabus]
Does the four-year catch-all limitations period of 28 U.S.C. §1658 apply to new causes of action created by public law 102-166, 105 Stat. 1071, the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which were codified at 42 U.S.C. §1981(a) and (b)?
199 VAN V. GOLDSTEIN
[Syllabus]
199
[Syllabus]
199
[Syllabus]
199 LAPIDES V. BOARD OF REGENTS OF UNIV. SYSTEMOF GA.
[Syllabus]
A State waives its Eleventh Amendment immunity when it removes a case from state court to federal court.
199
[Syllabus]