| |
| | Washingtonpost.com Special Report: Jones vs. Clinton |
 | | Summary judgment is appropriate when "the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). |
 | | Indeed, in her memorandum in opposition to the President's motion for judgment on the pleadings (filed July 29, 1997), plaintiff stated that "[a] sexual harassment claim brought pursuant to ยง 1983 is similar to a Title VII sexual harassment claim" and cited King v. |
 | | 1998) (noting that to withstand summary judgment on quid pro quo claims, plaintiffs were required to produce evidence showing that the harassment complained of affected tangible aspects of their compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment). |
| www.washingtonpost.com /wp-srv/politics/special/pjones/docs/order040198.htm (7187 words) |
|