Marcia Hocevar v. Purdue Frederick Co.
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
223 F.3d 721 (2000)
- Written by Haley Gintis, JD
Facts
Marcia Hocevar (plaintiff) worked at Purdue Frederick Company (the company) (defendant) under the supervision of Timothy Amundsen. During Hocevar’s time at the company, she endured inappropriate conduct from her supervisors and coworkers. Amundsen frequently spoke about sex and used derogatory language to describe employees, including describing people as “bitches” and “fucking new guy.” On one occasion, Amundsen’s supervisor, Paul Kasprzycki, attempted to force Hocevar to slow dance with him during a work event. On another occasion, Kasprzycki announced at a work event that he was going to have sexual intercourse with three different female employees. Hocevar was also subjected to remarks from supervisors about her legs during a presentation. The various incidents happened over a three-year period. Eventually, Hocevar filed a Title VII sexual-harassment claim in federal district court against the company. Hocevar alleged that the harassment she endured created a hostile work environment. Hocevar testified about the various events and also admitted to using foul language while around Amundsen, Kasprzycki, and other employees. However, Hocevar claimed that Amundsen’s use of the word bitch created an inference of sex discrimination because of its derogatory effect on women. The district court found that Hocevar had not established a sexual-harassment claim and granted the company summary judgment. Hocevar appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Beam, J.)
Concurrence (Gibson, J.)
Dissent (Lay, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.