FindLaw | Find a Lawyer. Find Answers.

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California granted the employer's motion for summary judgment in this sexual harassment case because the plaintiff "unreasonably failed to take advantage of the preventive and corrective opportunities provided by AGCO or to otherwise avoid harm." Applying the criteria set forth by the Supreme Court in Farragher for assessing supervisory liability in hostile work environment cases, the Court found that AGCO had a formal policy set forth in its handbook defining sexual harassment and outlining a specific complaint procedure. Further, AGCO terminated one supervisor and severely disciplined two others. AGCO also notified plaintiff, who had been placed on paid administrative leave at her own request, that it had taken significant action and would hold her position for her. Plaintiff never responded. Accordingly, the Court held that AGCO had met its burden of proving the affirmative defense outlined in Farragher.