Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 19 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Scruggs v. GARST SEED COMPANY.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Scruggs v. GARST SEED COMPANY Anchor | green | “the severity of the allegedly discriminatory conduct, its frequency, whether it is physically threatening or humiliating or merely offensive, and whether it unreasonably interferes with an employee's work performance.” | 7 |
| 2 | Michelle L. LINDALE, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. TOKHEIM CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant | green | “must not only demonstrate that a hostile work environment existed but also that the abusive working environment was so intolerable that her resignation was an appropriate response.” | 3 |
| 3 | Brenda Dandy v. United Parcel Service, Inc. | green | “this entertaining turn of events.” | 3 |
| 4 | Caskey v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. | green | “to prevail on an fmla interference claim, tarpley must establish: '(1) she was eligible for the fmla's protections; (2) her employer was covered by the fmla; (3) she was entitled to leave under the fmla; (4) she provided sufficient notice of her intent to take leave; and (5) her…” | 3 |
| 5 | Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. Elston Self Service Wholesale Groceries, Inc. | green | “develop an argument to dispute the district court's finding” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.