From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Henderson v. Burlington Coat

Appeals Court of Massachusetts
Jul 1, 2008
889 N.E.2d 451 (Mass. App. Ct. 2008)

Summary

finding that, despite the defendant's argument that the plaintiff was not performing his job at an acceptable level due to his termination for “inappropriate behavior,” the plaintiff satisfied the third prong because “prior to the allegation of sexual harassment he was performing his job adequately.”

Summary of this case from Dyjak v. BayState Health Sys., Inc.

Opinion

No. 07-P-1248.

July 1, 2008.


Decisions Pursuant to Rule 1:28.

Judgment reversed and case remanded for further proceedings consistent with the memorandum and order of the Appeals Court.


Summaries of

Henderson v. Burlington Coat

Appeals Court of Massachusetts
Jul 1, 2008
889 N.E.2d 451 (Mass. App. Ct. 2008)

finding that, despite the defendant's argument that the plaintiff was not performing his job at an acceptable level due to his termination for “inappropriate behavior,” the plaintiff satisfied the third prong because “prior to the allegation of sexual harassment he was performing his job adequately.”

Summary of this case from Dyjak v. BayState Health Sys., Inc.
Case details for

Henderson v. Burlington Coat

Case Details

Full title:DARRY HENDERSON v. BURLINGTON COAT FACTORY WAREHOUSE OF BRAINTREE, INC

Court:Appeals Court of Massachusetts

Date published: Jul 1, 2008

Citations

889 N.E.2d 451 (Mass. App. Ct. 2008)
72 Mass. App. Ct. 1105

Citing Cases

Dyjak v. BayState Health Sys., Inc.

Therefore, because Defendant invokes the Confidentiality Policy violation at the third step of the…