News & Analysis as of

Title VII › Retaliation › McDonnell Douglas Formula

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act is a United States federal law enacted in 1964 and aimed at preventing discrimination in the workplace on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, and religion. Title VII... more +
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act is a United States federal law enacted in 1964 and aimed at preventing discrimination in the workplace on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, and religion. Title VII has been subsequently extended to discrimination on the basis of pregnancy and sexual stereotypes and to prohibit sexual harassment. Title VII applies to all employers with fifteen or more employees including private employers, state and local governments, and educational institutions.  less -
FordHarrison

Eleventh Circuit Clarifies Standard for Identifying Comparators in Title VII and ADA Discrimination Cases

FordHarrison on

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

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace

Second Circuit Clarifies Pleading Standard for Title VII Claims

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace on

A Second Circuit panel recently revived a former employee’s racial discrimination suit against New York City, reversing in part the Southern District of New York’s dismissal of her case. In Littlejohn v. City of New York,...more

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

Retaliation in the Fourth Circuit: Recent Decision Creates New Challenges for Employers

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

In May 2015, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (which has jurisdiction over federal courts in Maryland, West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina) issued an opinion with negative consequences for employers...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

The Fourth Circuit Asks What For, Answers with But For: The Determination that a Landmark United States Supreme Court Decision...

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC on

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

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

Fourth Circuit Affirms Continued Validity of McDonnell-Douglas Test Following Supreme Court Decision

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP on

In Foster v. University of Maryland-Eastern Shore, the Fourth Circuit recently made clear that the McDonnell-Douglas test is alive and well, rejecting a District Court’s decision which had attempted to back away from the...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

SuperVision Today - May 2015

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC on

In This Issue: - Notes from the Chair and Executive Editor - The Fourth Circuit Asks What For, Answers with But For: The Determination that a Landmark United States Supreme Court Decision Does Not Change Employment...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Fourth Circuit Adopts Lower Burden for Plaintiffs to Survive Summary Judgment on Retaliation Claims

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on

In its 2013 Nassar decision, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that plaintiffs who allege workplace retaliation under Title VII and related statutes must demonstrate that the retaliatory animus is a “but for” cause of the...more

7 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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide