News & Analysis as of

Termination Discrimination Adverse Employment Action

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Run Over by the Failure to Train: Fifth Circuit Holds Inadequate Training May Be an Adverse Employment Action

For employers, figuring out what constitutes an adverse employment action under Title VII may seem elusive. In general, an adverse employment action is an ultimate employment decision that affects job duties, compensation or...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Opposing Employer Actions Directed at General Public Not Protected Activity

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: An employee who expresses opposition to an employer’s policies and practices that affect members of the general public is not engaging in an activity that FEHA protects, because the activity is not opposing...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

What’s an “Implied” Request for an ADA Reasonable Accommodation?

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: A divided panel of the Eighth Circuit recently decided that an employer may be required to assume or infer from the circumstances that an employee is seeking a reasonable accommodation – even when no...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Cat’s Paw, Part II: “Termination Review” by Independent Decision Makers Can Break the Causal Chain

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Last week, we wrote about the “Cat’s Paw” theory of liability —where a person is used unwittingly to accomplish another person’s discriminatory purpose in the workplace. A common example would be when a racist employee...more

Zelle  LLP

Retaliation: Realities and Myths

Zelle LLP on

Unlawful workplace retaliation can take several forms, and claims for retaliation arise under a number of different statutes and common law theories. Workers compensation statutes, for example, contain provisions that...more

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

Court Shoots Down ADA Discrimination Claim Premised on Employer's Alleged Embarrassment

It would never occur to most employers that "embarrassment" could serve as the grounds for a disability discrimination claim, but that's exactly what an employee attempted to argue in Lester v. City of Lafayette. In this...more

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

California Family Rights Act Interference Claims Proceed

Moore v. Century Gaming Management, Inc., No. B249978 (June 4, 2014): The California Court of Appeal recently ruled in an employee’s favor in a suit in which she claimed that her employer interfered with her rights under the...more

Pullman & Comley - Labor, Employment and...

How Do You Win a Discrimination Case?

Obviously, the simple answer is to not discriminate. But it also is important to have well-documented facts that support a business-related justification for the employer’s action and to demonstrate the plaintiff’s lack of...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

In the wake of the California Supreme Court's Harris Decision, A FEHA Claimant Must Show Discrimination was a "Substantial...

It now should be clear to employers in California that the litigation rules are different as to what must be presented in discrimination lawsuits to succeed. Notably, just last week, in Alamo v. Practice Management...more

Stoel Rives LLP

Oregon Court of Appeals Continues Debate About Status of Wrongful Discharge Claims In Oregon in Kemp v. Masterbrand Cabinets, Inc.

Stoel Rives LLP on

Last week the Oregon Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Kemp v. Masterbrand Cabinets, Inc., holding that the plaintiff’s common law wrongful discharge claim was not precluded by the statutory remedies then available under...more

Laner Muchin, Ltd.

Supreme Court Makes Defending Title VII Cases Easier For Employers; Decides To Review Noel Canning, Will Rule On NLRB Recess...

Laner Muchin, Ltd. on

On June 24, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court issued opinions in two cases which are clear victories for employers. First, in Vance v. Ball State University, the Supreme Court held that “an employer may be vicariously liable for...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

An "Honest Belief" Remains a Viable Defense Option

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Termination and other adverse employment actions often give rise to claims of intentional discrimination and other litigation. In many cases, the issues will boil down to an assertion that the facts supporting the employer’s...more

Nossaman LLP

California Supreme Court Clarifies Standard For “Mixed Motive” Defense To Employment Discrimination Claims

Nossaman LLP on

In a partial victory for employers, the California Supreme Court ruled in Harris v. City of Santa Monica that even when an employee proves that a discriminatory motive was a “substantial factor” in an adverse employment...more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

California Supreme Court Issues Employer-Friendly Decision on Mixed-Motive Defense

On February 7, 2013, the California Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Harris v. City of Santa Monica. The California high court upheld the “mixed-motive” defense in cases brought under California’s Fair Employment...more

FordHarrison

Legal Alert: California Supreme Court Issues "Mixed Motive" Decision Favorable To Employers

FordHarrison on

According to a new California Supreme Court opinion, once an employee claiming discrimination demonstrates that a discriminatory reason for his or her termination substantially motivated an adverse employment decision, the...more

15 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