{"disclaimer":"This is a summary of public court records and is not legal advice. Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.","party":{"slug":"harley-davidson-et-al","displayName":"Harley Davidson, Et al.","totalCases":2},"cases":[{"caseId":"mo:sc100116:2024-01-30","opinionId":"1ca68933-bd08-5474-86ff-9e1696ff02dd","slug":"emanuel-matthews-et-al-appellants-v-harley-davidson-et-al-respondents-100116","caseName":"Emanuel Matthews, et al., Appellants, vs. Harley Davidson, et al., Respondents.","caseNumber":"SC100116","court":"mo","courtLabel":"Supreme Court of Missouri","decisionDate":"2024-01-30","year":2024,"display_summary":"Appellants, former employees of Harley-Davidson and Syncreon, sued their employers alleging hostile work environment and aiding and abetting racial discrimination under the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA). The circuit court dismissed their claims for failure to state a claim. The Missouri Supreme Court vacated the circuit court's judgment, holding that the Appellants sufficiently pleaded facts to establish claims for both hostile work environment and aiding and abetting racial discrimination. The case was remanded for further proceedings.","primaryTopic":"employment-law","topicSlugs":["employment-law","civil-procedure","appellate-procedure"],"outcomeNorm":"mixed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=205113","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/emanuel-matthews-et-al-appellants-v-harley-davidson-et-al-respondents-100116","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"employment","label":"Employment Law","href":"/practice-areas/employment","score":38,"source":"tag","evidence":["tag: employment","topic: employment-law","text: hostile work environment","text: discrimination","text: mhra"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/employment"},{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","evidence":["topic: civil-procedure","topic: appellate-procedure"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"}],"role":"respondent"},{"caseId":"moappwd:wd85267:undated","opinionId":"e03eff1a-6b0f-5a6a-9925-c9e51b1ec04f","slug":"emanuel-matthews-et-al-v-harley-davidson-et-al-d85267","caseName":"Emanuel Matthews, Et al.\nvs.\nHarley Davidson, Et al.","caseNumber":"WD85267","court":"moappwd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District","decisionDate":null,"year":2023,"display_summary":null,"primaryTopic":null,"topicSlugs":[],"outcomeNorm":"dismissed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=195017","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/emanuel-matthews-et-al-v-harley-davidson-et-al-d85267","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"employment","label":"Employment Law","href":"/practice-areas/employment","score":20,"source":"tag","evidence":["tag: employment"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/employment"}],"role":"respondent"}]}