Skip to main content

Harman v. Unisys Corp.

E.D. Va.September 17, 2010No. 1:08-cv-00542Cited 2 times
Mixed ResultUnisys Corporation
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Gerald Bruce Lee
Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
442 Civil rights jobs
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
motion to dismiss

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

RetaliationDiscrimination

Outcome

Court denied defendant's motion to dismiss Counts I (Title VII retaliation), II (ADEA retaliation), and III (§1981 retaliation), allowing plaintiff to proceed on all three retaliation claims. Court granted defendant's motion to strike plaintiff's request for attorney's fees because plaintiff was proceeding pro se.

What This Ruling Means

# Harman v. Unisys Corp. - Plain English Summary **What Happened** An employee named Harman filed a lawsuit against Unisys Corporation claiming the company retaliated against him. He alleged that Unisys punished him for complaining about discrimination based on race and age. **Court's Decision** The court allowed Harman's case to move forward. The judge rejected Unisys's attempt to dismiss the retaliation claims under three different federal laws protecting workers. However, the court struck down Harman's request for attorney's fees because he was representing himself without a lawyer. **Why This Matters for Workers** This ruling reinforces that employees can pursue retaliation claims when employers punish them for reporting discrimination. Workers who complain about unfair treatment based on race or age have legal protections. The decision shows courts take retaliation complaints seriously and won't automatically dismiss them before trial. However, workers representing themselves may face limitations on recovering legal costs, making it harder to afford proper representation.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.