News & Analysis as of

Hiring & Firing › Mixed Motive Cases

Hiring & Firing refers to the process of recruiting, interviewing and offering employment and the process of evaluating performance and dismissing employees. Hiring & Firing is a highly regulated area and... more +
Hiring & Firing refers to the process of recruiting, interviewing and offering employment and the process of evaluating performance and dismissing employees. Hiring & Firing is a highly regulated area and can create tremendous liability for employers who fail to properly adhere to acceptable employment practices. Some of the potential pitfalls in this area stem from discriminatory hiring practices, improper performance evaluations, and retaliatory firings.  less -
Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

Chris Lazarini Comments on Direct vs. Circumstantial Evidence in Discrimination Case

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

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

Foley & Lardner LLP

Being Untruthful About the Reason for a Termination Can Get an Employer in Hot Water

Foley & Lardner LLP on

We have written in the past about how important it is for an employer to be accurate in articulating its reason for terminating an employee. For example, if an employer is terminating an employee for poor performance, the...more

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense

Jury Rejects Whistleblower Claim By Former SpaceX Employee

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense on

On June 7, 2017, a California jury returned a 9-3 verdict, dismissing whistleblower claims brought by a former Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (“SpaceX”) employee. Jason Blasdell v. Space Exploration Technologies...more

McAfee & Taft

Court rules unauthorized absence justifies firing

McAfee & Taft on

The federal appeals court that covers Oklahoma recently ruled in favor of Dillon Companies, Inc., a Kansas corporation that does business as King Soopers, in a lawsuit filed by a former grocery store employee who claimed he...more

McAfee & Taft

Wrongful discharge – alive and well in Oklahoma

McAfee & Taft on

It’s been awhile since Oklahoma’s Supreme Court weighed in on the ability of fired employees to sue their employers for wrongful discharge. Now a vomiting nurse gets to take a shot at the nursing center that terminated his...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

McAfee & Taft

Appeals court rules no pretext found in ADEA discrimination case

McAfee & Taft on

The Tenth Circuit recently ruled that pretext would not be found if an employer terminated an employee based on a genuine belief that the employee had violated company policy....more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Fourth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Age Discrimination Claim Despite Manager's Comments About Need to Retire

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on

In order for a plaintiff to prove age discrimination, he/she must show that age is a “but for” reason for the termination or other employment action. In other words, but for the plaintiff’s age, the termination decision would...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

Supreme Court Issues Two Employer-Friendly Title VII Decisions

Ballard Spahr LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday issued two Title VII decisions favorable to employers. One case examined the definition of a supervisor under the anti-discrimination laws, and the other dealt with an employee’s burden of...more

Littler

California Supreme Court Rules "Mixed Motive" Is a Mixed Bag for Employers

Littler on

The California Supreme Court recently clarified the defenses available to employers defending against claims of discrimination. In Harris v. City of Santa Monica, No. BC341469 (Cal. Feb. 7, 2013), the court ruled that, if a...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Fenwick Employment Brief - February 2013

Fenwick & West LLP on

In This Issue: *FEATURE ARTICLES - Cal Supreme Court Refuses To Immunize Employers In Mixed-Motive Discrimination Cases, But Significantly Limits Remedies - Manager's Bias, Public Policy, And Defamation...more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

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

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP on

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

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

California Supreme Court Splits The Baby In Mixed-Motive Employment Discrimination Case

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP on

In Wynona Harris v. City of Santa Monica, decided on February 7, 2013, the California Supreme Court addressed the following question...more

Fisher Phillips

California Supreme Court's "Mixed Motive" Ruling May Have Major Impact on Fair Employment and Housing Claims

Fisher Phillips on

On February 7, 2013 the California Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, affirmed that backpay and reinstatement are not available remedies for a plaintiff under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) when an employer...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

California Supreme Court Upholds “Mixed Motive” Defense in Employment Discrimination Cases

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP on

In a long-awaited ruling issued Thursday, February 7, 2013, the California Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeal's decision overturning a damages verdict against the City of Santa Monica, finding that employers may...more

Orrick - Employment Law and Litigation

California Supreme Court to Clarify Standard of Proof in FEHA Discrimination Cases

Orrick - Employment Law and Litigation on

Last month, the California Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that will clarify the standard of proof required for “mixed-motive” discrimination claims under the California Fair Housing and Discrimination Act...more

17 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