United States Sixth Circuit

In a Title VII action claiming that Defendant terminated Plaintiff's employment in retaliation for Plaintiff's fiancee's EEOC complaint, summary judgment for Defendant is affirmed, where Title VII does not create a cause of action for third-party retaliation for persons who have not personally engaged in protected activity.

Appellate Information

• Argued 12/10/2008
• Decided 06/05/2009
• Published 06/05/2009

Judges

• Before:  BOGGS, Chief Judge;  MARTIN, BATCHELDER, DAUGHTREY, MOORE, COLE, CLAY, GILMAN, GIBBONS, ROGERS, SUTTON, COOK, McKEAGUE, GRIFFIN, KETHLEDGE, and WHITE, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  David O'Brien Suetholz, Segal, Lindsay & Janes, Louisville, Kentucky, for Appellant.  Leigh Gross Latherow, VanAntwerp, Monge, Jones, Edwards & McCann, LLP, Ashland, Kentucky, for Appellee.  Gail S. Coleman, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Washington, D.C., for Amici Curiae.   ON BRIEF:  David O'Brien Suetholz, Joseph Delano Wibbels, Jr., Segal, Lindsay & Janes, Louisville, Kentucky, for Appellant.  Leigh Gross Latherow, Gregory L. Monge, VanAntwerp, Monge, Jones, Edwards & McCann, LLP, Ashland, Kentucky, for Appellee.  Gail S. Coleman, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Washington, D.C., Rae T. Vann, Norris, Tysse, Lampley & Lakis, LLP, Washington, D.C., Nelson D. Cary, Alexandra T. Schimmer, Vorys, Sater, Seymour & Pease LLP, Columbus, Ohio, for Amici Curiae.