Free Consultation   Contact Us
No Recovery No Fee*   (310) 356-1006     (323) 909-WAGE (9243)

News

Call Now for a Free Consultation (310) 356-1006

Both California and Federal law have generally defined sexual harassment as unwanted sexual conduct of two main types: quid pro quo harassment and hostile environment harassment. Quid pro quo harassment occurs when employment is conditioned, expressly or impliedly, on the submission to unwelcome sexual advances. See Nichols v. Frank (9th Cir 1994) 42 F.3d 503. Hostile environment harassment generally occurs when the plaintiff’s work environment is made hostile or abusive by sexual misconduct. See, Doe v. Capital Cities (1996) 50 Cal.App.4th 1038, 1045; Mogilefsky v. Superior Court (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 1409, 1414; Montero v. AGCO Corp. (9th Cir 1999) 192 F.3d 856, 860; Fuller v. City of Oakland (9th Cir 1995) 47 F.3d 1522, 1527.

The Harasser

Under California Law the harasser is personally liable to the victim of the harassment. If the harasser is a supervisor, or in a supervisory position, the employer is also liable to the victim. For example, if a manager of a fast food...
Read More

Harassment Feels Wrong

There are several legal definitions of what constitutes actionable workplace harassment. Some definitions are statutory (i.e., created by statute) while others are stated in case law (i.e., set forth by judges in appellate and Supreme Court decisions). However, as a preliminary matter...
Read More