For reprint rights or to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices or call 949-702-5390.

To buy more copies, call 866-531-1492 or email subscribe@dailyjournal.com
This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Litigation

Jan. 8, 2000

No Thanks!

Kelly v. City of Oakland , USCA 9th CA, 98-16482, Nov. 23 1999, a workplace same-sex sexual harassment case, analyzed two types of sexual harassment and reaches divergent conclusions on a single set of facts. A far-reaching application of Kelly's implications could result in a greater burden of proof for hostile environment sex harassment plaintiffs who do not have strong factual support for quid pro quo harassment.

By Joseph G. Metscher
         Kelly v. City of Oakland, USCA 9th CA, 98-16482, Nov. 23 1999, a workplace same-sex sexual harassment case, analyzed two types of sexual harassment and reaches divergent conclusions on a single set of facts. A far-reaching application of Kelly's implications could result in a greater burden of proof for hostile environment sex harassment plaint...

To continue reading, please subscribe.

Already a subscriber?

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)



By using our website, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. You can learn more about how we use cookies by reviewing our Privacy Policy here.