Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson

477 U.S. 57 (1986)

From our private database of 46,200+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson

United States Supreme Court
477 U.S. 57 (1986)

Play video

Facts

In 1974, Mechelle Vinson (plaintiff) was hired by Sidney Taylor to work at a branch office of Meritor Savings Bank (Meritor) (defendant). Taylor, a Meritor vice president and branch manager, became Vinson’s supervisor. Vinson, by her own merit, was eventually promoted to assistant branch manager. In 1978, Vinson took sick leave and was eventually let go for excessive use of the sick-leave policy. Following her termination, Vinson sued Meritor and Taylor, alleging sex discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. According to Vinson, although her relationship with Taylor was initially strictly professional, Taylor began making unwelcome sexual advances toward Vinson shortly after she was hired. At trial, Vinson testified that she first refused Taylor’s advances, but eventually agreed to engage in sexual intercourse with him because she feared losing her job. Over the course of several years, Vinson and Taylor continued having intercourse; additionally, Vinson testified that Taylor fondled her in front of other employees, exposed himself to her at work, and forcibly raped her several times. Vinson never reported the harassment to Taylor’s supervisors or filed an official complaint with Meritor. Taylor denied the allegations and contended Vinson’s accusations stemmed from a business dispute. The district court concluded that Vinson was not a victim of sex discrimination or sexual harassment, because she did not suffer any economic harm, and any intimate relationship she had with Taylor was voluntary. The court of appeals reversed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Rehnquist, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 777,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 777,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 777,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,200 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership