Bennett

Bennett v. K-Mart Corp.

Good Law
10 F. App'x 520
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 21, 2001No. 99-16951; D.C. No. CV-97-00679-DWHCalifornia423 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Bennett presented evidence that Weston tried to unzip her sweater one week and grabbed her breast the next. This conduct is sufficiently severe to support a finding of hostile work environment. See Meritor Sav. Bank, FSB v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57, 67 , 106 S.Ct. 2399 , 91 L.Ed.2d 49 (1986). K-Mart may overcome the presumption of vicarious liability for Weston’s harassment if it can prove that (i) it exercised reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct any harassing behavior, and (ii) Bennett unreasonably failed to take advantage of preventive or corrective opportunities it provided. See Burlington Indus. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742, 765 , 118 S.Ct. 2257 , 141 L.Ed.2d 633 (1998).

K-Mart’s policy against harassment was a reasonable step toward preventing harassment: It was well-disseminated and conspicuously posted throughout the workplace, and it provided a procedure for registering complaints that promised no retaliation. Cf. Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 808 , 118 S.Ct. 2275 , 141 L.Ed.2d 662 (1998) (employer could not have exercised reasonable care to prevent supervisors’ harassing conduct where, inter alia, it failed entirely to disseminate its…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.