Vance v. Ball State University, 570 U.S. 421 (2013), is a U.S. Supreme Court case regarding who is a "supervisor" for the purposes of harassment lawsuits. The Supreme Court upheld the Seventh Circuit's decision in a 5–4 opinion written by Samuel Alito, rejecting the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's interpretation of who counts as a supervisor. The case was important because it resolved a dispute between several different circuits. The issue presented before the Court was: — Questions presented, Vance v. Ball State University
Attributes | Values |
---|
rdf:type
| |
rdfs:label
| - Vance v. Ball State University (en)
|
rdfs:comment
| - Vance v. Ball State University, 570 U.S. 421 (2013), is a U.S. Supreme Court case regarding who is a "supervisor" for the purposes of harassment lawsuits. The Supreme Court upheld the Seventh Circuit's decision in a 5–4 opinion written by Samuel Alito, rejecting the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's interpretation of who counts as a supervisor. The case was important because it resolved a dispute between several different circuits. The issue presented before the Court was: — Questions presented, Vance v. Ball State University (en)
|
foaf:name
| - Vance v. Ball State University (en)
|
dcterms:subject
| |
Wikipage page ID
| |
Wikipage revision ID
| |
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
| |
Link from a Wikipage to an external page
| |
sameAs
| |
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
Dissent
| |
docket
| |
JoinDissent
| - Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan (en)
|
JoinMajority
| - Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas (en)
|
LawsApplied
| |
oyez
| |
ParallelCitations
| |
Prior
| |
USPage
| |
USVol
| |
ArgueDate
| |
ArgueYear
| |
case
| - Vance v. Ball State University, (en)
|
courtlistener
| |
DecideDate
| |
DecideYear
| |
fullname
| - Vance v. Ball State University (en)
|
Holding
| - An employee is a "supervisor" for purposes of vicarious liability under Title VII only if he or she is empowered by the employer to take tangible employment actions against the victim. (en)
|
justia
| |
Litigants
| - Vance v. Ball State University (en)
|
majority
| |
other source
| |
other url
| |
has abstract
| - Vance v. Ball State University, 570 U.S. 421 (2013), is a U.S. Supreme Court case regarding who is a "supervisor" for the purposes of harassment lawsuits. The Supreme Court upheld the Seventh Circuit's decision in a 5–4 opinion written by Samuel Alito, rejecting the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's interpretation of who counts as a supervisor. The case was important because it resolved a dispute between several different circuits. The issue presented before the Court was: Whether, as the Second, Fourth, and Ninth Circuits have held, the Faragher and Ellerth "supervisor" liability rule (i) applies to harassment by those whom the employer vests with authority to direct and oversee their victim's daily work, or, asthe First, Seventh, and Eighth Circuits have held (ii) is limited to those harassers who have the power to "hire, fire, demote, promote, transfer, or discipline" their victim. — Questions presented, Vance v. Ball State University (en)
|
Concurrence
| |
cornell
| |
googlescholar
| |
prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
page length (characters) of wiki page
| |
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
is Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
of | |