Martin v. Howard University

Issue: (1) Whether it is the duty of the Court or the jury to decide whether undisputed conduct constitutes "protected activity" for reporting "sexual harassment," within the meaning of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, particularly in light of Crawford v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tenn.; (2) whether Title VII protects stalking victims -- who are primarily women -- when they report stalking in the workplace; (3) Whether a trial court violate a plaintiff's Fourteenth and/or Fifth Amendment rights to due process by refusing to apply Rule 60(b) to reverse a judgment that is inconsistent with a Supreme Court Decision issued while the case is still in the Appellate Process? (4) Whether a trial court violate a plaintiff's Fourteenth and/or Fifth Amendment rights to due process and thwart civil rights litigation by placing a decision on her motion for mandatory Rule 37 sanctions – in excess of $364,000 -- in indefinite abeyance and close the case without deciding it?

Briefs and Documents

Certiorari-stage documents

• Opinion below (D.C. Cir. Ct. App.)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief in opposition (forthcoming)
• Motion to file amicus brief and amicus brief of the National Organization for Women Foundation