Ohio Revised Code Chapter 111, known as Ohio’s Safe at Home program, protects survivors of domestic violence, stalking, human trafficking, rape, or sexual battery by allowing them to keep their residential addresses confidential and out of public records. The program is administered by the Secretary of State’s office and is designed to prevent abusers from locating survivors.
In Okun v. Misiewicz, No. CV-98-67084-S (July 31, 2001), the plaintiff alleged sexual harassment by a former employer in violation of the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act (CFEPA), seeking compensatory and punitive damages, but the defendant moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Plaintiffs brought a class action lawsuit against Sweetwater Union School District (the “District”) and several individuals, alleging unequal participation opportunities for females at Castle Park High School (“CPHS”). Plaintiffs argued that Defendants violated Title IX’s provision that prohibits excluding or discriminating against anyone on the basis of sex in educational programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance. The court applied a three-part test to determine whether the District complied with Title IX which included: (1) substantially proportionate at
Doctors and clinics sued anti-abortion activist group Operation Rescue for invasion of privacy, tortious interference, and civil conspiracy. Anti-abortion activists planned to picket and obstruct abortion clinics and homes of physicians who worked for the clinics to coincide with the 1992 Republican National Convention. The district court granted a permanent injunction to restrict anti-abortion demonstrations, which prohibited activists from, among other things, demonstrating within specified areas of each clinic. Operation Rescue appealed.
Otey v. Director of Alabama Law Enforcement Agency, (N.D. Ala. 2017) is a U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama case where a federal constitutional challenge to the state’s Sex Offender Registration and Community Notification Act (SORCNA) was considered.
Rebecca Wright was a waitress at Arlington Steakhouse, Inc. for four months. She alleged that during this time, her supervisor, Christopher O’Dell, made lewd sexual comments to her, touched her in sexual ways that she found offensive, and created a hostile work environment by his 13. Specifically, Ms.
After disclosing her pregnancy to her employers, Pinchback, a correctional officer at a county jail, was terminated. As a reason for the termination, Sheriff O’Loughlin explained that while pregnant, Pinchback could not perform the duties of a correctional officer and was placing her baby’s health in danger. Pinchback petitioned Florida’s Human Rights Commission for relief, resulting in a finding that O’Loughlin had wrongfully terminated Pinchback in violation of Florida’s Human Rights Act.
In the case O’Rourke v. National Foreign Trade Council, Inc., 176 A.D.3d 517 (1st Dept. 2019), a nonprofit employee alleged that her supervisor made gender-based derogatory remarks, such as: “you women are such delicate flowers” and “I only support humble and meek women.” The supervisor also removed her responsibilities, excluded her from projects after she complained, and undermined her role.
Plaintiff worked as a research specialist under her supervisor, Dennis Montgomery (“Montgomery”). On several occasions during her employment Montgomery asked Plaintiff to perform oral sex on him. He also repeatedly told Plaintiff he was going to arrive at one of Plaintiff’s many jobsites to engage in sexual activity with her. Twice Montgomery masturbated in front of Plaintiff during work hours. During one of those times, Plaintiff ran from the office to her car and Montgomery followed her, grabbed her arm, tried to grab her breasts, and tried to stop her from entering her car.
Plaintiff Parker alleged that defendant Grissom, a general manager who hired her as a bookkeeper, sexually harassed her. She reported the harassment to her immediate supervisor, Link. Parker stated that she feared losing her job if she did anything, so asked that Link do nothing. The harassment continued, and Link reported it to Vinson, a member of the Utility’s Board of Commissioners. Vinson agreed that plaintiff would likely lose her job if she reported the harassment. Plaintiff later discussed the issue with Vinson, who did not assure her that she would not
