Footnote
* It is noted that the Supreme Court has not as yet ruled as to whether same sex
harassment is covered under the term "sex" in title VII, and that currently
there is a split of authority on the issue (see, Joyner v AAA Cooper
Transp., 597 F Supp 537 [MD Ala 1983], affd 749 F2d 732 [11th Cir 1984];
Wright v Methodist Youth Servs., 511 F Supp 307 [ND Ill 1981]; Garcia v Elf Atochem N. Am., 28 F3d 446 [5th Cir 1994]; Hopkins v
Baltimore Gas & Elec. Co., 871 F Supp 822 [D Md]). However, based on the
language of the Supreme Court in Meritor Sav. Bank v Vinson (477 US, at
64, supra ["when a supervisor sexually harasses a subordinate because of the
subordinate's sex, that supervisor 'discriminates' on the basis of sex"]), I
believe that should the issue reach the Supreme Court, same sex harassment will
be deemed covered under title VII.
Click here or use your browser "Back" button to return to Maffei v. Kolaeton Industry, Inc.