context: Other cases have looked to the plaintiffs behavior, relationship with the alleged harasses and history with the company to conclude the plaintiff could not prove the conduct was unwelcome. See, e.g., Scusa v. Nestle U.S.A.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 488 F.3d 739, 746-47
citation_a.parenthetical: addressing qn evidentiary dispute and noting that, although a preexisting relationship by no means nullifies otherwise actionable harassment, "the existence of a current or former social relationship between the harasser and the harassee can shed light on such relevant questions as whether the complained-of conduct was unwelcome"
citation_a.sentence: Co., 181 F.3d 958, 962, 966 (8th Cir. 1999) (deciding there was insufficient proof where the plaintiff'“engaged in behavior similar to that which she claimed was unwelcome and offensive,” despite timely complaints and journal entries indicating certain behaviors were unwelcome); Souther, 523 Fed.Appx. at 355 (concluding the conduct was not unwelcome based, in part, on the plaintiffs conduct, the fact she continued to return to the company for work, and her almost thirty-year relationship with the alleged harasser including consensual sex during some of that time); see also Ammons-Lewis v. Metro. Water Reclamation Dist. of Greater Chi., 488 F.3d 739, 746-47 (7th Cir. 2007) (addressing qn evidentiary dispute and noting that, although a preexisting relationship by no means nullifies otherwise actionable harassment, “the existence of a current or former social relationship between the harasser and the harassee can shed light on such relevant questions as whether the complained-of conduct was unwelcome”).
citation_b.signal: no signal
citation_b.identifier: 181 F.3d 958, 962, 966
citation_b.parenthetical: deciding there was insufficient proof where the plaintiff'"engaged in behavior similar to that which she claimed was unwelcome and offensive," despite timely complaints and journal entries indicating certain behaviors were unwelcome
citation_b.sentence: Co., 181 F.3d 958, 962, 966 (8th Cir. 1999) (deciding there was insufficient proof where the plaintiff'“engaged in behavior similar to that which she claimed was unwelcome and offensive,” despite timely complaints and journal entries indicating certain behaviors were unwelcome); Souther, 523 Fed.Appx. at 355 (concluding the conduct was not unwelcome based, in part, on the plaintiffs conduct, the fact she continued to return to the company for work, and her almost thirty-year relationship with the alleged harasser including consensual sex during some of that time); see also Ammons-Lewis v. Metro. Water Reclamation Dist. of Greater Chi., 488 F.3d 739, 746-47 (7th Cir. 2007) (addressing qn evidentiary dispute and noting that, although a preexisting relationship by no means nullifies otherwise actionable harassment, “the existence of a current or former social relationship between the harasser and the harassee can shed light on such relevant questions as whether the complained-of conduct was unwelcome”).