Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Vickers v. Fairfield Medical Center

United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
453 F.3d 757 (6th Cir. 2006)


Facts

Christopher Vickers (plaintiff) worked as a private police officer for Fairfield Medical Center (FMC) (defendant) with fellow police officers, Kory Dixon, John Mueller, and Steve Anderson (defendants). Anderson, a police chief, was Vickers’s supervisor. From May 2002 through March 2003, the defendants allegedly subjected Vickers to relentless, sexually explicit harassment on a daily basis regarding Vickers’s sexual orientation, sexual preferences, and sexual activities outside the workplace. The harassment included derogatory comments and name-calling, obscene gestures, physical abuse, and humiliation in front of other employees. Vickers sued FMC and his co-workers, alleging sex discrimination, sexual harassment, and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. The district court held that the defendants were entitled to judgment as a matter of law, because Vickers failed to state a claim that would entitle him to relief. Vickers appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Gibbons, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Dissent (Lawson, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

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 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.

  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. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 174,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.