Hughes v. Pair Presents Potential Quid Pro Quo Loophole

The California Supreme Court in Hughes v. Pair (July 2009) ruled that sexual requests to a plaintiff, without consequential adverse action in response to a plaintiff’s refusal to comply with sexual favors, does not constitute quid pro quo sexual harassment. After the plaintiff’s trustees had voted to give her money for just one month for  Read More …

Common Mistake #6 – Not Knowing What Constitutes Actionable Sexual Harassment or Discrimination

   It is important for victims to know their rights. Using tools such as literature on sexual harassment and the advice of an attorney to understand what conduct constitutes sexual harassment is a powerful step in confirming a victim’s rights and can build confidence and assist in moving forward with the next steps in stopping  Read More …