Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Wyckoff v State of MD 522 F.supp.2d 730

Wyckoff v State of MD 522 F.supp.2d 730

Ratings: (0)|Views: 16|Likes:
Published by Thalia Sanders

More info:

Published by: Thalia Sanders on Nov 28, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

11/28/2011

pdf

text

original

 
Westlaw Delivery Summary Report for PATRON ACCESS,-
Date/Time of Request: Monday, November 28, 2011 10:51 EasternClient Identifier: PATRON ACCESSDatabase: FSFINDCitation Text: 522 F.Supp.2d 730Lines: 606Documents: 1Images: 0
Civil. equal employment Wyckoff v. State of Marylandhttp://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=20071252522FSupp2d730_11189.xml&docbase=CSLWAR3-2007-CURR
The material accompanying this summary is subject to copyright. Usage is governed by contract with Thomson Reuters,West and their affiliates.
 
United States District Court,D. Maryland,Northern Division.Barbara WYCKOFF, Plaintiff,v.State of MARYLAND, Maryland State Police, etal., Defendants.Civil No. WDQ-07-0058.Oct. 1, 2007.
Background:
Female former trooper for MarylandState Police (MDSP) sued her former employer andMDSP lieutenant for violations of Title VII, Article24 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights, and Firstand Fourteenth Amendments. Defendants moved todismiss.
Holdings:
The District Court,William D. Quarles,Jr., J., held that:(1)sexually discriminatory denial of reassignmentto Criminal Investigation Division (CID) detectiveposition;(2)trooper did not suffer “materially adverse” ac-tion that would support Title VII retaliation claimthrough lieutenant's bringing of administrativecharge against her for damaging departmentvehicle, denial of permanent reassignment to altern-ate barracks not under lieutenant's command, or be-ing put on “stress leave”;(3)trooper stated claim that lieutenant engaged insex discrimination in violation of Equal ProtectionClause and § 1983 by considering her gender indenying her detective job; and(4)trooper failed to state First Amendment retali-ation claim.Motions granted in part and denied in part.West Headnotes
[1]Federal Civil Procedure 170A 1829
170AFederal Civil Procedure170AXIDismissal170AXI(B)Involuntary Dismissal 170AXI(B)5Proceedings170Ak1827Determination170Ak1829k. Construction of pleadings.Most Cited Cases
Federal Civil Procedure 170A 1835
170AFederal Civil Procedure170AXIDismissal170AXI(B)Involuntary Dismissal 170AXI(B)5Proceedings170Ak1827Determination170Ak1835k. Matters deemed ad-mitted; acceptance as true of allegations in com-plaint.Most Cited CasesOn motion to dismiss for failure to state aclaim. court should view the complaint in lightmost favorable to plaintiff and accept as true allwell-pleaded allegations, but is not bound to acceptas true a legal conclusion couched as a factual al-legation, nor allegations that are merely conclusory,unwarranted deductions of fact, or unreasonable in-ferences.Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 12(b)(6),28U.S.C.A.
[2]Federal Civil Procedure 170A 673
170AFederal Civil Procedure170AVIIPleadings and Motions170AVII(B)Complaint 170AVII(B)1In General170Ak673. Claim forrelief in gener- al.Most Cited CasesAlthough notice pleading requirements of fed-eral civil rule are not onerous, plaintiff must allegefacts that support each element of her claim.Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 8(a)(2), 28 U.S.C.A.
[3]Federal Civil Procedure 170A 1832
170AFederal Civil Procedure170AXIDismissalPage 1522 F.Supp.2d 730
(Cite as: 522 F.Supp.2d 730)
© 2011 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.
 
170AXI(B)Involuntary Dismissal 170AXI(B)5Proceedings170Ak1827Determination170Ak1832k. Matters consideredin general.Most Cited CasesIn deciding motion to dismiss for failure tostate a claim, court will consider facts stated incomplaint and any incorporated documents.Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 12(b)(6), 28 U.S.C.A.
[4]Civil Rights 78 1545
78Civil Rights78IVRemedies Under Federal Employment Dis-crimination Statutes78k1543Weight and Sufficiency of Evidence 78k1545k. Prima facie case.Most CitedCasesIf Title VII plaintiff presents direct evidence of discrimination, then plaintiff need not establishprima facie case because creating inference of dis-crimination is unnecessary. Civil Rights Act of 1964, § 703(a),42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e-2(a).
[5]Civil Rights 78 1119
78Civil Rights78IIEmployment Practices78k1119k. Adverse actions in general.Most Cited CasesTo state claim for discrimination under TitleVII, employee must demonstrate that she sufferedan employment action that adversely affectedterms, conditions, or benefits of her employment;this inquiry focuses on ultimate employment de-cisions, including hiring, granting leave, dischar-ging, promoting, and compensating. Civil RightsAct of 1964, § 703(a)(1),42 U.S.C.A.§2000e-2(a)(1).
[6]Civil Rights 78 1169
78Civil Rights78IIEmployment Practices78k1164Sex Discrimination in General 78k1169k. Public employment.MostCited CasesFemale state trooper satisfied “adverse employ-ment action” element of Title VII sex discrimina-tion claim against Maryland State Police (MDSP)in connection with denial of requested reassignmentto detective position in Criminal Investigation Divi-sion (CID) because, as lieutenant allegedly stated toher and her sergeant/supervisor, there were “toomany girls” in unit to justify putting her there;while MDSP contended that CID detective job wasequivalent to plaintiff's rank of Trooper First Class,trooper alleged that position was a “status” promo-tion and that she lost training, supervisory, and fu-ture promotion opportunities as result of MDSP'sdenial of her application. Civil Rights Act of 1964,§ 703(a)(1),42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e-2(a)(1).
[7]Civil Rights 78 1243
78Civil Rights78IIEmployment Practices78k1241Retaliation for Exercise of Rights 78k1243k. Practices prohibited or re-quired in general; elements.Most Cited CasesTo establish Title VII retaliation claim, em-ployee must demonstrate that (1) she engaged in aprotected activity, (2) employer acted adverselyagainst her, and (3) there was a causal connectionbetween the protected activity and the adverse ac-tion. Civil Rights Act of 1964, § 704(a),42U.S.C.A. § 2000e-3(a).
[8]Civil Rights 78 1245
78Civil Rights78IIEmployment Practices78k1241Retaliation for Exercise of Rights 78k1245k. Adverse actions in general.Most Cited CasesUnited States Supreme Court has confined lim-its of Title VII antiretaliation provision to retali-ation that produces an injury or harm and adopted amaterial adversity standard that asks whether theaction might have dissuaded a reasonable workerfrom making or supporting a charge of discrimina-tion. Civil Rights Act of 1964, § 704(a),42Page 2522 F.Supp.2d 730
(Cite as: 522 F.Supp.2d 730)
© 2011 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->