News & Analysis as of

Cat's Paw Sexual Harassment

Mintz - Employment Viewpoints

Negligent Employers May Be Held Liable For a Non-Supervisory Employee’s Discriminatory Actions Under “Cat’s Paw” Theory Says...

The Second Circuit recently adopted the “Cat’s Paw” theory of liability in Title VII cases. This was hardly a surprise as other Circuit Courts had done the same after the United States Supreme Court endorsed Cat’s Paw in a...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Second Circuit “Purrs” On Cat’s Paw Liability Case

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: Recently, the Second Circuit held that the “cat’s paw” theory of liability may be used to support recovery for claims of retaliation where an employer negligently relies on information provided by a...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Watch Out for the Cat’s Paw - Employers May Be Accountable for Low-Level Employee Actions

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In the world of employment law, there is something called the “Cat’s Paw” theory of liability. The name comes from a fable dating back to the 17th century in which a clever monkey persuades a naïve cat to pull roasting...more

Orrick - Employment Law and Litigation

Cat’s Paw Making New Tracks: Second Circuit Extends Cat’s Paw Principle to Retaliation Claims and to Low-Level Employees

The “cat’s paw” doctrine, a concept first coined by Seventh Circuit Judge Richard Posner in 1990 and adopted by the Supreme Court in 2011, applies when an employee is subjected to an adverse employment action by a decision...more

Pullman & Comley - Labor, Employment and...

Don’t Be A Cat’s-Paw

Most sexual harassment policies include a procedure to investigate complaints, often specifying that the investigation will be timely and thorough, and may include interviews with the employees involved, witnesses, and anyone...more

Baker Donelson

Employers Beware of the Cat's Paw

Baker Donelson on

The cat scratches again! Five years ago, the United States Supreme Court handed down Staub v. Proctor Hospital, wherein it held that an employer may be liable for a supervisor's discriminatory animus when the independent...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

Second Circuit Adopts “Cat’s Paw” Theory of Imputing Nonsupervisory Employee’s Retaliatory Intent to Employer

In Vasquez v. Empress Ambulance Service, Inc., No. 15-3239-cv (August 29, 2016), the Second Circuit Court of Appeals set new precedent when it held that an employer may be held liable for the retaliatory intent of a...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Ambulance Service Liable for Sexting Monkey?

An ambulance service may be liable for damages arising from sexting by a monkey it employed, the Second Circuit ruled on August 29. Actually, the monkey was a man, but the court sided with a female employee who sued the...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

The Cat Is Out of the Bag: Second Circuit Rules Cat’s Paw Theory Applies to Nonmanagerial Coworkers

Rarely has the maxim “hard cases make bad law” found greater application than in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals’ recent decision to expand the “cat’s paw” doctrine adopted by the Supreme Court of the United States in...more

Genova Burns LLC

The Monkey and the Cat: Second Circuit Adopts “Cat’s Paw” Theory of Liability for the Acts of a Non-Supervisory Employee in Title...

Genova Burns LLC on

On August 29, 2016, a unanimous panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit revived a retaliation lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 under the “cat’s paw” theory of liability. In...more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

About that new “cat’s paw” decision . . .

Employers should beware of being too quick to believe an employee who accuses a co-worker of wrongdoing. If the accuser has an illegal motive (such as discrimination or retaliation), and if the employer is “negligent” in...more

Cole Schotz

Second Circuit Reverses Dismissal Of Retaliation Claim Citing Cat’s Paw Liability

Cole Schotz on

The Second Circuit recently invoked a 17th century fable in reviving an employee’s retaliation claim against her employer even where the employer had no retaliatory intent. In Vasquez v. Empress Ambulance Service, SDNY,...more

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace

Second Circuit Holds That Non-Supervisory Employee’s Retaliatory Intent May Be Imputed to an Employer Under Title VII

In Vasquez v. Empress Ambulance Service, Inc., the Second Circuit adopted the “cat’s paw” theory of liability under Title VII and held that the retaliatory intent of a low-level, non-supervisory employee may be imputed to an...more

13 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide