What were the main legal issues in this case? What did the appeals court decide?

What evidence supports the conclusion that the alleged harasser Mullen was a supervisor of Wyatt? Why is there some doubt about whether Mullen is one of Wyatt's supervisors or merely a co-worker? What difference does this make?

Why does the appeals court conclude that Nissan had not proven its affirmative defense to Wyatt's hostile environment claim? That it had not shown that it exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct harassment? That it had not shown that Wyatt unreasonably failed to take advantage of the company's preventive and corrective measures?

Given the various employment actions to which Wyatt is subjected, why is this not a tangible employment action case? What is the difference between "tangible employment actions" in the context of a harassment claim and "[materially] adverse employment actions" in the context of a retaliation claim?

What is the evidence of retaliatory motivation behind the employment actions taken against Wyatt? Why is the company's claim that it acted based on concerns about inadequate performance not a sufficient defense, at least at this stage of the litigation?

Do you agree with the court's decisions in this case? Why or why not?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

This sounds like a detailed legal analysis Without specific information about the case youre referri... View the full answer