Kerry Ellison worked as a revenue agent for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in San Mateo, California. Sterling Gray's desk was 20 feet from Ellison's desk, two rows behind and one row over. Revenue agents in the San Mateo office often went to lunch in groups. In June, when no one else was in the office, Gray asked Ellison to lunch. She accepted. Ellison alleges that after the June lunch, Gray started to pester her with unnecessary questions and to hang around her desk. On October 9, Gray asked Ellison out for a drink after work. She declined but suggested that they have lunch the following week. She did not want to have lunch alone with him, and she tried to stay away from the office during lunchtime. One day during the following week, Gray uncharacteristically dressed in a three-piece suit and asked Ellison out for lunch again. Again, she did not accept.
On October 22, Gray handed Ellison a note he wrote on a telephone message slip, which read:
I cried over you last night and I'm totally drained today. I have never been in such a constant term oil (sic). Thank you for talking with me. I could not stand to feel your hatred for another day.

When Ellison realized that Gray had written the note, she became shocked and frightened and left the room. Gray followed her into the hallway and demanded that she talk to him, but she left the building. Ellison later showed the note to Bonnie Miller, who supervised both Ellison and Gray. Miller said, "This is sexual harassment." Ellison asked Miller not to do anything about it. She wanted to try to handle it herself. Ellison asked a male co-worker to talk to Gray, to tell him that she was not interested in him, and to leave her alone. The next day, Thursday, Gray called in sick.
Ellison did not work on Friday, and on the following Monday, she started four weeks of training in St. Louis, Missouri. Gray mailed her a card and a typed, singlespaced three-page letter. She describes this letter as "twenty times, a hundred times weirder" than the prior note. Gray wrote, in part:

I know that you are worth knowing with or without sex…. Leaving aside the hassles and disasters of recent weeks, I have enjoyed you so much over these past few months. Watching you. Experiencing you from O so far away. Admiring your style and elan…. Don't you think it odd that two people who have never even talked together, alone, are striking off such intense sparks…. I will [write] another letter in the near future.

Explaining her reaction, Ellison stated: "I just thought he was crazy. I thought he was nuts. I didn't know what he would do next. I was frightened."
She immediately telephoned Miller. Ellison told her supervisor that she was frightened and really upset. She requested that Miller transfer either her or Gray because she would not be comfortable working in the same office with him. Miller asked Ellison to send a copy of the card and letter to San Mateo. Miller then telephoned her supervisor, Joe Benton, and discussed the problem. That same day she had a counseling session with Gray. She informed him that he was entitled to union representation.
During this meeting, she told Gray to leave Ellison alone. At Benson's request, Miller apprised the labor relations department of the situation. She also reminded Gray many times over the next few weeks that he must not contact Ellison in any way. Gray subsequently transferred to the San Francisco office on November 24. Ellison returned from St. Louis in late November and did not discuss the matter further with Miller.

After three weeks in San Francisco, Gray filed union grievances requesting a return to the San Mateo office. The IRS and the union settled the grievances in Gray's favor, agreeing to allow him to transfer back to the San Mateo office provided he spend four months in San Francisco and promise not to bother Ellison. On January 28, Ellison first learned of Gray's request in a letter from Miller explaining that Gray would return to the San Mateo office. The letter indicated that management decided to resolve Ellison's problem with a six-month separation and that it would take additional action if the problem recurred. After receiving the letter, Ellison was "frantic." On January 30, she filed with the IRS a formal complaint alleging sexual harassment. She also obtained permission to transfer to San Francisco temporarily when Gray returned.
Ellison filed a complaint in federal district court, and the court granted the government's motion for summary judgment on the grounds that Ellison had failed to state a prima facie case of sexual harassment due to a hostile work environment. Ellison appealed. From Gray's perspective, he could be portrayed by his attorney as a modernday Cyrano de Bergerac wishing to woo Ellison by his words. There is no evidence that he harbored ill will toward her, and his representative would argue that Gray's conduct was isolated and trivial.
From Ellison's perspective, Gray's first note shocked her and the three-page letter truly frightened her. Her attorney would portray Gray's actions as poisoning Ellison's work environment and, in a most severe manner, adversely affecting her personal life. What standard should apply in judging the severity of the conduct to determine if it amounts to sexual harassment? Should it be a reasonable woman standard? How would such a standard differ from the Oncale standard of objective severity from the perspective of a reasonable person in the plaintiff's position, considering all the circumstances? Do men and women have different views on what constitutes sexual harassment? Did the employer take proper corrective action if the victim ended up being transferred as a result of the harassment? Decide. [Ellison v. Brady, 924 F.2d 872 (9th Cir.)]