Circuit split · employment law
Whether Title VII's prohibition on sex discrimination encompasses same-sex sexual harassment
1 federal appellate case on this question, each acknowledging the disagreement in its own words.
- Fredette v. BVP Management Associates112 F3D 1503
Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals · May 22, 1997
“5 While there is a split of authority amongst the circuits, and also amongst the district courts addressing the issue, we believe that the weight of the case law and the better-reasoned cases support the viability of the particular Title VII claim before us today.” — Split of authority
“10 Although we believe that the weight of the case law and the better-reasoned cases support Fredette’s claim, there is a split in the circuits and in the case law.” — Acknowledges a circuit split
Empirical analysis of this case →
The other side of the split
Decisions the acknowledging court(s) named as the opposing or joined side, quoted in the acknowledging opinion's own words.
- Joined by · 3rd Cir.Tomkins v. Public Serv. Elec. & Gas Co.568 F.2d 1044
- Discussed · 7th Cir.Baskerville v. Culligan Int'l Co.50 F.3d 428
- Discussed · 9th Cir.Steiner v. Showboat Operating Co.25 F.3d 1459
- Joined by · 6th Cir.Yeary v. Goodwill Industries-Knoxville, Inc.107 F.3d 443
- On the other side · 5th Cir.Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Servs., Inc.83 F.3d 118
- On the other side · 5th Cir.Garcia v. Elf Atochem North America28 F.3d 446
“Pizza Hut of America, Inc., 99 F.3d 138 (4th Cir.1996), held that a male employee could state a viable Title VII claim for sex discrimination against his employer on ac *1507 count of sexual harassment by his homosexu” — Fredette v. BVP Management Associates, acknowledging the split
- DiscussedMcWilliams
“Moreover, it seems from the statement of the facts in Garcia that the harassing conduct at issue there was similar in nature to that in McWilliams, i.e., teasing and harassment with sexually-focused speech or conduct, but not involving a male superior’s solicitation of sexual favors from a male subordinate on condition of work benefits or detriment.” — Fredette v. BVP Management Associates, acknowledging the split
- DiscussedJohnson v. Transportation Agency, Santa Clara County480 U.S. 616
- Discussed · 11th Cir.Wilson v. Bailey934 F.2d 301
- Discussed · 7th Cir.McQuillen v. Wisconsin Educ. Ass'n Council830 F.2d 659
What the split turns on
Cases are grouped by the legal question they announce a split on, classified from the court's own acknowledgment sentence. Verified acknowledgments only. Counter-side decisions are extracted from the acknowledging opinions' own text and linked only when the citation resolves in this corpus. See all circuit splits.