Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 19 SEPTEMBER 2006

Individual Employees May Be Liable For Violations Committed Under The Missouri Human Rights Act

Littler Mendelson
Explore more from Littler Mendelson

In a case of first impression, the Missouri Court of Appeals in Cooper v. Albacore Holdings Inc, et al., No. ED87027 (Mo. Ct. App., Aug. 29, 2006), ruled that an individual employee may be liable in sexual harassment cases brought under the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA).

United StatesStrategy
Erin Webber
Erin Webber
Author LinkedIn connections

In a case of first impression, the Missouri Court of Appeals in Cooper v. Albacore Holdings Inc, et al., No. ED87027 (Mo. Ct. App., Aug. 29, 2006), ruled that an individual employee may be liable in sexual harassment cases brought under the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA).

Factual And Procedural Background

Tamara Cooper, a former Vice President of Human Resources for Albacore Holdings' Abiliti Solutions, Inc., and the only female member of the senior business team, sued the company and its Chief Executive Officer, Gordon Quick, for sexual harassment and retaliation in violation of the MHRA.

Cooper alleged that while at a dinner party, Quick spilled a glass of wine onto the front of her blouse and slacks. While trying to help Cooper remove the wine from her clothing, Quick touched Cooper's breasts, chest above her breasts, thigh, torso and arm several times. Cooper told Quick a number of times to stop touching her but he continued. Additionally, Cooper alleged Quick tried to touch

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

See more popular content from

Article

The Colorado AI Law You Prepared For Is Gone, And The Rulemaking Comment Window Closes October 26

If your Colorado compliance program is built around impact assessments, it is built for a statute that will never take effect. Senate Bill 24-205, the first comprehensive state AI statute in the country, was scheduled to take effect June 30, 2026. Colorado instead repealed and replaced it with Senate Bill 26-189, signed May 14, 2026, whose principal requirements apply to consequential decisions made on or after January 1, 2027.
United StatesStrategy
Jones Walker LLP
Jones Walker LLP
Article

White House Announces AI Responsibility Accord, Executive Orders, And Super Intelligence Task Force

The Trump Administration has introduced a voluntary regulatory framework for artificial intelligence through the White House Accord on Super Intelligence, signed by six leading tech companies. This new approach emphasizes corporate self-policing with safety audits and board oversight, while simultaneously rebranding government AI terminology and establishing a new interagency coordination force. How will this light-touch regulatory strategy balance innovation with mounting safety concerns as AI capabilities
United StatesStrategy
Crowell & Moring LLP
Crowell & Moring LLP
Article

The Protect College Sports Act Clears The Senate: What Stakeholders Need To Know

The U.S. Senate has passed the Protect College Sports Act by a 77-22 vote, marking the first time Congress has approved comprehensive federal legislation governing college athletics. This sweeping bill establishes a uniform NIL framework, locks in the House v. NCAA revenue-sharing model with caps and retention funds, grants limited antitrust exemptions, and imposes new transfer restrictions, health mandates, and reporting requirements.
United StatesStrategy
Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP
Article

California SB 574 Would Bar Attorneys From Delegating The Practice Of Law To Generative AI

California Senate Bill 574 proposes a groundbreaking statutory framework that would prohibit attorneys from delegating legal practice to generative artificial intelligence, while imposing disclosure requirements and verification standards across litigation, arbitration, and court filings. The legislation raises fundamental questions about how traditional definitions of "the practice of law" apply to AI-augmented legal work, from document review to contract analysis. If signed by Governor Newsom, California
United StatesStrategy
A&O Shearman
A&O Shearman
Article

Contract Lifecycle Management And Why Legal Teams Need It

Contract lifecycle management has become the most widely adopted legal technology tool in corporate legal departments, addressing fundamental challenges around contract visibility, workflow automation, and risk management. Legal operations expert Jeff Reisner breaks down the CLM landscape, implementation considerations, and why this technology has emerged as the foundational piece most legal teams tackle first when modernizing their operations.
United StatesStrategy
Axiom
Axiom