I-13 – Policies, Policies, Policies, and Microchips Embedded in Employees
Several recent Supreme Court decisions have upended causation standards in the statutory alphabet soup of federal remedial rights. It is now clear that “but for” causation governs discrimination claims under the Age...more
Windsor v. United States - Issue: Can the federal government define marriage? Holding: No. Loser: The federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which was passed in 1996 and signed by President Clinton, was...more
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
On June 24, 2013, in a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified that an employee alleging unlawful retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 must prove that a retaliatory motive was the...more
The Supreme Court of the United States, in Gunn v. Minton, determined that a Texas state court had jurisdiction over a legal malpractice claim, even though resolving the claim required the state court to address an issue of...more
On February 20, 2013, the Supreme Court issued a decision addressing the critical question of where plaintiffs can or must sue when their claims implicate patent law but are not traditional patent law claims. See Gunn v....more
A patent issue exerted its Circe-like effect on the Supreme Court again today in Gunn v. Minton, a decision overruling the Texas Supreme Court on the question of whether the existence of a patent issue in a legal malpractice...more
On January 16, 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral arguments in Gunn. The heart of the matter is whether the state-based malpractice action may be heard in state court or whether it must be heard in...more
“But-for” or “mixed motive” is a causation question not unknown to the U.S. Supreme Court. In Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228 (1989), a plurality held that the anti-discrimination provision of Title VII only...more
On December 10, 2012, the Supreme Court handed down a critical victory to federal employees in a highly technical case. This decision now gives federal employees a simpler and less confusing process for appealing...more