The McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework used to evaluate employment discrimination claims may not be permanently cast aside, but a recent decision reminds us that it is not the only means through which employees can...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh has spoken, and employers that once relied exclusively on McDonnell Douglas might need to rethink their litigation strategy in employment-discrimination cases. On December 12,...more
The Minnesota Supreme Court recently reaffirmed the use of the familiar McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework to analyze claims of retaliation under Minnesota law, despite the ask by the plaintiff-appellant and amici to...more
A territory manager for paint and coatings manufacturer PPG Architectural Finishes, Wallen Lawson was responsible for stocking and merchandising PPG paint products in Lowe’s home improvement stores in Southern California....more
On April 6, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court held that federal-sector plaintiffs in age discrimination cases brought under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) need not show that negative consideration of age is a...more
What does an age discrimination plaintiff have to prove to succeed? Federal employees may have an easier path for proving an age discrimination claim, if we are reading the tea leaves correctly on the Supreme Court’s oral...more
On March 21, 2019, in Lewis v. Union City, No. 15-11362, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (1) clarified the proper standard for the comparator analysis in intentional discrimination cases under the McDonnell...more
Bass, Berry & Sims attorney Chris Lazarini commented on a case in which a former financial advisor of JPMS claimed his employment was terminated based on racial discrimination. Through application of the three-part burden...more
White male discontent has been a major media talking point since the presidential election, and even long before. This talking point has made its way into the workplace, where tech firms are now being targeted for allegedly...more
In the past, we have counseled our clients on steps they can take to avoid creating a “convincing mosaic” of employment discrimination. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals first discussed the convincing mosaic of...more
Most employees who file employment discrimination claims hope for one of two things – a really sympathetic jury or an employer that is willing to generously settle the lawsuit to avoid the risks and uncertainties of trial. ...more
Seyfarth Synopsis. The Eleventh Circuit clarifies the framework in mixed-motive cases. Although damages are limited, a plaintiff can establish a mixed-motive claim by showing a protected characteristic was a motivating factor...more
Last week, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court issued a seminal ruling in Bulwer v. Mt. Auburn, which clarified the type of evidence an employment discrimination plaintiff needs to defeat a summary judgment motion. In...more
In 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States held that plaintiffs claiming retaliation under Title VII must prove that “but for” the retaliation they would not have been discharged. University of Texas Southwestern Medical...more
Federal law and most state laws protect employees who complain about discrimination and harassment from retaliatory adverse employment actions (such as demotion or termination). Because retaliation claims can succeed even...more