Stalnaker v. Kmart Corp.
United States District Court for the District of Kansas
71 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 705 (D. Kan. 1996)
Stalnaker (plaintiff) sued Kmart Corp. (defendant) alleging sexual harassment by employee Graves. Stalnaker sought to depose several witnesses concerning voluntary romantic conduct or sexually-related activities. Kmart countered that none of the witnesses had sexual involvement with Stalnaker and that any voluntary romantic activities on their part were irrelevant. Kmart sought an order from the court protecting its employees from giving depositions that Kmart alleged would cause them embarrassment and humiliation.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Rushfelt, J.)
What to do next…
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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
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. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 160,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,700 briefs, keyed to 186 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.