The use of sexual double entendre has been the frequent basis for many a sexual harassment claim.  You know the scene — an employee uses a double entendre as a means of making a sexual advance.  We all recognize that as a violation of sexual harassment policies.

But what happens when a judge uses double entendre in a judicial opinion?  We’ll let you be the judge (pun intended) of Judge Biery’s April 29th decision in Bar 35 Grille v. the City of San Antonio.  Forgetting about whether the not so-subtle sexual references are befitting of a sitting District judge, could some member of his staff use this of evidence of a hostile work environment?

While we’re on the topic, how is it the Friendly’s thinks there is no problem with naming one of their desserts the “Happy Ending Sundae.”  Last week, I had friends in town who had never been to Friendly’s and giggled like school children when they saw that dessert.  We surely are not the first people to make this connection.  Do you think an employee could use this as a basis for a hostile work environment claim?

Let us know what you think.