News & Analysis as of

Title VII › Vance v. Ball State University › Employer Liability Issues

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 -
Robinson & Cole LLP

Legal Update: Connecticut Supreme Court Adopts SCOTUS Definition of “Supervisor” for Establishing Vicarious Liability for Hostile...

Robinson & Cole LLP on

On August 1, 2024, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in O’Reggio v. Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities that the definition of “supervisor” set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in Vance v. Ball State University to...more

Seward & Kissel LLP

Employment Litigation Roundup: August 2024

Seward & Kissel LLP on

In a win for employers, the Connecticut Supreme Court defines “supervisor” narrowly for purposes of vicarious employer liability under Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act - Under Connecticut’s civil rights law, an...more

Dechert LLP

International Employment Law Review: August 2013 - Issue 4: Recent Employment Law Developments in the United States

Dechert LLP on

U.S. Supreme Court Decisions - Court Limits Definition of “Supervisor” Under Federal Anti-Discrimination Law - In Vance v. Ball State University (June 24, 2013), in a 5-4 decision, a majority of the Supreme...more

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

U.S. Supreme Court Issues Three Decisions Favorable to Employers

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati on

By the end of this year’s term, the United States Supreme Court had issued three “employer-friendly” decisions. While the decisions do not dramatically alter the employment law landscape, employers will still welcome the...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Raising the Bar on Employer Liability for Harassment and Retaliation

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

On June 24, the Supreme Court issued two new opinions in favor of employers, both five-to-four decisions that narrowly construe the scope of Title VII’s retaliation and employer liability rules and significantly raise the bar...more

Cole Schotz

United States Supreme Court Issues Two Employer-Friendly Decisions With Far-Reaching Impact in Employee Harassment Cases

Cole Schotz on

On June 24, 2013, the United States Supreme Court issued two employer-friendly opinions that substantially narrow potential liability for claims of supervisor misconduct and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act...more

Baker Donelson

Supreme Court Ruling Defines "Supervisor" and Gives Clarity, Peace of Mind to Employers

Baker Donelson on

Last month the U.S. Supreme Court adopted a bright-line standard for determining which employees qualify as supervisors in harassment lawsuits filed under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, thus resolving a split in the...more

Stoel Rives LLP

Part 2 of 2: Supreme Court Rules That "Supervisors" Under Title VII Must Have Power to Take Tangible Employment Actions

Stoel Rives LLP on

On Monday, we blogged about the first of two recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions interpreting Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar. Today, we’ll...more

Nossaman LLP

Did You Know…U.S. Supreme Court Narrowly Defines “Supervisor” For Purposes Of Title VII Employer Liability

Nossaman LLP on

In Vance v. Ball State University, No.11-556, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Ball State, making it harder for employees to sue employers for harassment under Title VII. ...more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

Impact of Supreme Court Pro-Employer Title VII Decisions Blunted by State Laws

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP on

On June 24th, the Supreme Court issued two important decisions that narrow the circumstances under which employers can be held liable for retaliation or harassment claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In...more

Foley Hoag LLP

Recent Supreme Court Cases Raise Bar for Plaintiffs Under Title VII

Foley Hoag LLP on

Two cases decided by the U.S. Supreme Court at the end of its 2012-13 term, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar and Vance v. Ball State University, will significantly alter the landscape of employment...more

Akerman LLP - HR Defense

Supreme Court Affirms Narrow Definition Of Supervisor Under Title VII

Akerman LLP - HR Defense on

The Supreme Court has ruled in Vance v. Ball State University that the authority to take tangible employment actions is the defining characteristic of a supervisor, and that without such authority an employee is not a...more

12 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