Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth

Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued April 22, 1998 Decided June 26, 1998
Full case name	Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth
Citations	524 U.S. 742 (more)
Argument	Oral argument
Holding
An employer is subject to vicarious liability to a victimized employee for an actionable hostile environment created by a supervisor with immediate (or higher) authority over the employee, subject to an affirmative defense when no tangible employment action is taken.
Court membership
Chief Justice William Rehnquist Associate Justices John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy David Souter · Clarence Thomas Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer
Case opinions
Majority	Kennedy, joined by Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor, Souter, Breyer
Concurrence	Ginsburg
Dissent	Thomas, joined by Scalia
Laws applied
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 US 742 (1998) is a US labor law case of the United States Supreme Court holding that employers are liable if supervisors create a hostile work environment for employees.

Facts

Kimberly Ellerth, a female employee at Burlington Industries, sued the company for sexual harassment on the part of her male supervisor. She alleged the vice president of sales made offensive remarks and unwanted overtures. She identified three episodes involving threats to deny tangible job benefits unless sexual favors were granted. She alleged a violation of title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The lower court dismissed her claim, noting that she had suffered no actual negative job consequences. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the lower court decision, but issued 8 separate opinions.

Judgment

In a 7–2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled in her favor. Justice Anthony Kennedy said that Congress had left it to the courts to determine the controlling principles. This majority ruling was summarized as follows:

“

Under Title VII, an employee who refuses the unwelcome and threatening sexual advances of a supervisor, yet suffers no adverse, tangible job consequences, may recover against the employer without showing the employer is negligent or otherwise at fault for the supervisor's actions, but the employer may interpose an affirmative defense.[1]

”

Justice Kennedy wrote the majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist, Justice Stevens, Justice O'Connor, Justice Souter, and Justice Breyer. Justice Ginsburg wrote a concurring opinion.

Justice Thomas wrote a dissenting opinion, joined by Justice Scalia.^[2]

Notes

1. Kathryn Cullen-DuPont (2009). Encyclopedia of Women's History in America. Infobase Publishing. pp. 38–39.
2. "BURLINGTON INDUSTRIES, INC. v. ELLERTH". Retrieved 6 September 2015.

References

• Cullen-DuPont, Kathryn. Encyclopedia of Women's History in America (Infobase Publishing, 2009) pp 38-39
• Perry Alan Zirkel; Sharon Nalbone Richardson; Steven Selig Goldberg (2001). A Digest of Supreme Court Decisions Affecting Education. Phi Delta Kappa International. p. 210.