In This Issue:

- U.S. Supreme Court to Rule on Causation Factor in Retaliation Claims

- Student Sues University Over the Right to Keep a Guinea Pig in a College Dorm for Emotional Support

- Delaware and New Jersey Provide Privacy Protection for Student Social Networking Activities

- Association of Tax-Exempt Schools Formed to Pool Insurance Risk is Not Exempt from Tax, Federal Judge Rules

- 403(b) Plans – New Correction Procedures and Prototype/Volume Submitter Approval Procedures

- Lehigh University Grad Gets C+ in Course and F in Court

- Excerpt from U.S. Supreme Court to Rule on Causation Factor in Retaliation Claims:

"The U.S. Supreme Court will decide “[w]hether Title VII’s retaliation provision and similarly worded statutes require a plaintiff to prove but-for causation (i.e. , that an employer would not have taken an adverse employment action but for an improper motive), or instead require only proof that the employer had a mixed motive (i.e. , that an improper motive was one of multiple reasons for the employment action).” University of Texas Southwestern Med. Ctr. v. Naiel Nassar, M.D. , Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed by the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. It is expected that the Court’s decision will resolve a split among circuits and clarify the burden a plaintiff must carry to prove a retaliation claim. The Petition for Writ of Certiorari notes that “mixed motives are easy to allege and difficult to disprove.” The burden of proving a single, “but-for” causation is greater because it requires that a plaintiff prove that an employment action was the result of retaliatory animus, not just that retaliation was a motivating factor in the employment action. Put another way, if a defendant can escape liability by demonstrating that the adverse action was motivated by a proper purpose, the plaintiff’s prospects of success are dramatically diminished."

Please see full alert below for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.