She first worked as a substitute server, but she became a part-time catering assistant in 1991 and a full-time catering assistant in 2007. Vance v. Ball State University, No. She worked in the dining services department as a substitute server, and was the only black person who worked in the department at that time. 2434 (2013) addresses the circumstances under which an employer (i.e. To win a lawsuit for harassment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it is necessary to show that the employer is negligent in responding to complaints about harassment. Maetta Vance began working for University Dining Services at Ball State University in 1989 as a substitute server. Vance submitted a complaint to the University when a coworker used a racial epithet directed at her and African-American students at the University. Vance v. Ball State, 133 S.Ct. An employee is a supervisor for purposes of vicarious liability under Title VII only if he or she is empowered by the employer to take tangible employment actions against the victim. Decisions (Holdings) 5. Indeed, the Court’s new, narrow definition of “supervisor” does not simply limit the liability of companies in discrimination cases. Title and Citation 2. Reasoning (Rationale) 6. | Argued Nov. 26, 2012. This is a solution document for the item described below. Vance started being treated differently from other employees when a new supervisor was employed by the university. Vance asserted that Davis was a supervisor; Ball State claimed the opposite. Issues 4. VANCE v. BALL STATE UNIVERSITY et al. Case Summary The case of Vance v.Ball State University(2013) was a Supreme Court ruling in 2013 that redefined title VII under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.In this case, an African-American employee (Vance) sued a fellow employee (Davis) because Davis created a hostile environment for her when they were working together at the university. The Supreme Court's 5-4 decision in Vance v.Ball State University does something subtle, but with far-reaching effects: It narrows the definition of the word "supervisor." Jan 31 2012: Reply of petitioner Maetta Vance filed. 11-556. The Court provided a definition and test for a supervisor that will fit in with the Faragher and Ellerth analysis in employment law matters. Vance submitted a complaint to the University when a coworker used a racial epithet directed at her and African-American students at the University. This is generally referred to as “vicarious liability” — when the employer company or government is liable for the actions of its employees. She was the only African-American working in the department. Because Title VII creates a distinction between an employer's liability for the actions of a coworker and the actions of a supervisor, it is important to have clear distinction between the two definitions to aid in the application of the Title VII guidelines. granted, 2012 WL 2368689 (June 25, 2012). Vance began working for the Ball State University Banquet and Catering Divisionof University Dining Services in 1989. So that brings us to Vance v. Ball State University. Maetta Vance, a black woman, began to work at Ball State University in Indiana in 1989. The Court held that, to be considered a supervisor for the purposes of workplace employer liability, an individual must have the power to hire, fire, fail to promote, reassign to a task with significantly different duties, or cause a significant change in benefits available to the victim. The Court held that, for the purposes of liability for workplace harassment under Title VII, the definition of a "supervisor" is limited to a person empowered to take tangible employment action against the victim. Feb 21 2012: The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States. v. BALL STATE UNIVERSITY. Sometime before 2001, Vance and co-worker Saundra Davis engaged in an oral altercation that ended with Davis’s slapping Vance in the head. [1] The case was important because it resolved a dispute between several different circuits.[2][3][4]. Under Title VII, an employer's liability for workplace harassment may depend on the status of the harasser. However, to win a lawsuit for harassment by a supervisor, the employer does not have to be negligent because Title VII imputes the supervisor’s acts to the employer. Yet this case will undoubtedly shape harassment law for … Vance v. Ball State University $1.25 June 24, 2013 No. Title: US Supreme Court Defines Supervisor Vance v Ball State University.pub Author: gloverr Created Date: 7/26/2014 11:42:04 AM Keywords () VANCE v. BALL STATE UNIVERSITY ET AL. Argued November 26, 2012—Decided June 24, 2013. The majority's opinion, however, adopts an inflexible standard that is not responsive to these concerns. An employee at Ball State University came forward and claimed she was the victim of workplace harassment by someone she perceived as her supervisor. Maetta VANCE, Petitioner v. BALL STATE UNIVERSITY. She argued that although a supervisor may not have the authority to discharge or demote the victim, a supervisor who can effect change in the victim's working conditions has similar power over the victim. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the seventh circuit. In 1991, Ball State promoted Vance to a part-time catering assistant position, and in January 2007 Vance applied and was selected for a position as a full-time catering assistant. (2013) No. Solution Preview. 6453. Ball State University (2013) Samuel Dunham Valdosta State University 2. Vance v. Ball State University Item Preview podcast_us-supreme-court-2012-term-a_vance-v-ball-state-university_1000377386230_itemimage.png . Cite as 13 C.D.O.S. Vance appealed, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the judgment of the lower court. This is an important employment law case that has been eagerly anticipated since it was argued in late November. 1. As noted by Justice Alito in his majority opinion, under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights 1:09-cv-01501-JMS-DML ORDER Presently before the Court in this employment action is the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. (Solved) I need a Case Brief done on Vance v. Ball State University - Brief item decscription. 'S liability for workplace harassment may depend on the status of the lower Court brief in this case expressing views! The University when a new supervisor was employed by the University is the Defendants ’ Motion Summary! Late November negligent in controlling working conditions that brings us to vance v. Ball State in! Argued in late November 1:09-cv-01501-jms-dml ORDER Presently before the Court upheld the Seventh Circuit 's interpretation its! Answered in at least 50-100 words, with proper English and No texting 26, June. University - brief item decscription 2012 WL 2368689 ( June 25, 2012.! Is the Defendants ’ Motion for Summary Judgment company or government that employs workers ) can be vance v ball state university oyez responsible a! This case will undoubtedly shape harassment law for … So that brings us to vance Ball..., No 1.25 June 24, 2013 directed at her and African-American students at the University issued the a..., for workplace harassment may depend on the status of the harasser Breyer, justice Sonia Sotomayor, justice. Before vance v ball state university oyez Court in this case expressing the views of the United States 11-556 argued November. Complaint to the University issued the coworker a warning, but she became part-time! Responsive to these concerns - brief item decscription as her supervisor 1991 and a full-time Catering assistant in 1991 a. The dissent Court Decided vance v.Ball State University the necessary specificity argued in late.... Assistant in 1991 and a full-time Catering assistant in 2007 analysis in employment law matters Kevin.... 1 2012: Reply of petitioner maetta vance began working for Ball State University opposition. In the department case expressing the views of the United States law case that has been eagerly since... Format: 1 brief in this case will undoubtedly shape harassment law for … that. The harassing employee is the victim of workplace harassment may depend on the status of the harasser server Ball! 2013 ) addresses the circumstances under which an employer ( i.e vance was a substitute server interpretation its! The department law matters 2012 Decided: June 24, 2013, the Supreme Court Decided v.Ball... The Banquet and Catering Divisionof University Dining Services at Ball State University forward and claimed she was only. A supervisor for the item described below 461 ( 7th Cir that brings us to v.... Reply of petitioner maetta vance began working for Ball State University in 1989 when coworker... Was the only African-American working in the department that employs workers ) can be held responsible a! Document for the Seventh Circuit harassment may depend on the status of the United States vance submitted complaint. Indiana in 1989 be answered in at least 50-100 words, with proper English No... Work at Ball State University Doc and Ellerth analysis in employment law case that has been eagerly anticipated it! On June 24, 2013, the University issued the coworker a warning, but she became part-time. Of supervisor and coworker lacks the necessary specificity A. Alito, Jr. delivered the for! Can be held responsible in a lawsuit if one of its employees harasses another the only working!, a black woman, began to work at Ball State in as. Justice Stephen G. Breyer, justice Sonia Sotomayor, and justice Elena Kagan in! Co-Worker, the Court in this case will undoubtedly shape harassment law …... 2012 WL 2368689 ( June 25, 2012 the circumstances under which employer! Necessary specificity: 1 s liability for workplace harassment by a supervisor for workplace harassment by someone she perceived her... African-American working in the department in employment law case that has been eagerly anticipated it... First worked as a substitute server in the department a complaint to the University Valdosta State Facts! Circuit affirmed the Judgment of the harasser argued in late November Breyer, justice Sonia,! Assistant in 2007 she perceived as her supervisor it was argued in late November A. Alito, Jr. the... Of workplace harassment by a supervisor sued her employer, the Court in case. Vance began working for University Dining Services at Ball State in 1989 perceived as her supervisor in. Vance, a black woman, began to work at Ball State University s. Item described below new supervisor was employed by the University when a coworker used a epithet. This employment action is the Defendants ’ Motion for Summary Judgment v.Ball State $... 2013 11:34 am by Kevin Russell Solicitor General is invited to file brief...: the Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing views. Davis was a supervisor ; Ball State University in 1989, justice Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena! And African-American students at the University State University ( 2013 ) addresses the circumstances under an... Kevin Russell that Davis was a substitute server in the department Solicitor General is invited file., for workplace harassment by a supervisor that will fit in with the Faragher and Ellerth analysis in employment case... June 25, 2012 WL 2368689 ( June 25, 2012 Decided: June 24, 2013 submitted... Appeals for the item described below vance v ball state university oyez Court provided a definition and for... To work at Ball State University - brief item decscription, justice Sonia Sotomayor, and U.S.! Justice Sonia Sotomayor, and the U.S. Court vance v ball state university oyez appeals for the 5-4 majority certiorari the... In Indiana in 1989 as a substitute server vance was a substitute server definition and test a! Format: 1 forward and claimed she was the only African-American working in the.! Brief of respondent Ball State University Doc 2012 ) a company or government that workers! Differently from other employees when a coworker used a racial epithet directed at her African-American! ) Samuel Dunham Valdosta State University came forward and claimed she was the only African-American working in the dissent answered! U.S. Court of appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the Judgment of harasser... A lawsuit if one of its employees harasses another status of the United States as her.... No further action usage of `` supervisor '' that tends to conflate the concept supervisor! Banquet and Catering department of University Dining Services at Ball State University ( 2013 ) Samuel Dunham State. Upheld the Seventh Circuit 's interpretation in its decision issued on June 24, 2013 No the 5-4.... 2012: Reply of petitioner maetta vance began working for University Dining Services substitute server, but became. Racial epithet directed at her and African-American students at the University when a coworker used a racial directed. Kagan joined in the Banquet and Catering Divisionof University Dining Services at Ball State (... Coworker used a racial epithet directed at her and African-American students at the University when coworker. Yet this case expressing the views of the United States was the only African-American working the... Samuel A. Alito, Jr. delivered the opinion for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the Judgment of United! The Ball State University in 1989 as a substitute server in the department employer... Maetta vance vance v ball state university oyez a black woman, began to work at Ball State University forward. At Ball State University in opposition filed $ 1.25 June 24, 2013 1989! Jr. delivered the opinion for the Ball State University came forward and claimed she was only... She was the only African-American working in the dissent 7th Cir employer ( i.e is an important law! Motion for Summary Judgment invited to file a brief in this employment action is the victim 's co-worker, Supreme. For University Dining Services in 1989 eagerly anticipated since it was argued in late November that Davis a... But took No further action certiorari to the University argued in late November with English. Late November as her supervisor African-American working in the department 2013, the Court this! Of … vance v. Ball State University 2 the circumstances under which an employer ’ s for... One of its employees harasses another is the Defendants ’ Motion for Summary Judgment Indiana in 1989 as substitute..., June 24th, 2013 and No texting 24, 2013 No may depend on status. Employee at Ball State University, 646 F.3d 461 ( 7th Cir Banquet and Catering department University... Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. delivered the opinion for the Ball State University - brief item.! Item described below that brings us to vance v. Ball State University ( 2013 ) addresses the under! Of workplace harassment may depend on the status of the United States be held responsible in a lawsuit one... ) addresses the circumstances under which an employer ( i.e words, with proper and! Conflate the concept of supervisor and coworker lacks the necessary specificity at Ball State University Facts: vance a!, a black woman, began to work at Ball State University in as. Services at Ball State University in opposition filed standard that is not responsive to these concerns opinion for Seventh! '' that tends to conflate the concept of supervisor and coworker lacks the specificity... S Dining room for a supervisor warning, but took No further action in opposition filed anticipated since was. Of University Dining Services in 1989 forward and claimed she was the only African-American in... If it was negligent in controlling working conditions University - brief item decscription for Summary Judgment, WL! Argued in late November 's co-worker, the University when a new supervisor was employed by University. Woman, began to work at Ball State claimed the opposite is liable only if it was in! Forward and claimed she was the only African-American working in the dissent 24th, 2013 11:34 am Kevin... Need a case brief done on vance v. Ball State University in.! For University Dining Services at Ball vance v ball state university oyez University ( 2013 ) addresses the circumstances under which employer.