News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Evidentiary Standards › Appeals

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Warner Norcross + Judd

Supreme Court Rejects Heightened Evidentiary Standard for Majority-Group Plaintiffs in Title VII Discrimination Claims

Warner Norcross + Judd on

On June 5, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services that courts cannot apply a heightened evidentiary standard to majority-group plaintiffs when deciding discrimination claims. The...more

Bricker Graydon LLP

Supreme Court Rejects “Background Circumstances” Requirement for Title VII Discrimination Claims in Ames v. Ohio Department of...

Bricker Graydon LLP on

In a unanimous decision issued on June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court held the “background circumstances” requirement imposed by some lower courts in what are often referred to as “reverse discrimination” claims is...more

Pierce Atwood LLP

Supreme Court Clarifies Title VII Evidentiary Standards in “Reverse Discrimination” Cases, Removing Heightened Standard

Pierce Atwood LLP on

In Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Servs., the U.S. Supreme Court recently settled a circuit split and held that the Sixth Circuit’s “background circumstances” rule, which was applied only to plaintiffs from majority...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Supreme Court Rejects Elevated Standard for Proving Reverse Discrimination Claims

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected use of a special legal test for plaintiffs to prove illegal bias in reverse discrimination cases. ...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Supreme Court Rejects Heightened Evidentiary Burden For “Reverse Discrimination” Title VII Plaintiffs

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP on

On June 5, 2025, in a unanimous ruling authored by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the U.S. Supreme Court revived the employment discrimination claims of an Ohio woman who contends that she was the victim of “reverse...more

Berkshire

Supreme Court Rejects Higher Standards for Majority Plaintiffs in Title VII Disparate Treatment Cases

Berkshire on

The Supreme Court has voted unanimously to end a Circuit Court split regarding whether members of a “majority group” have additional evidentiary burdens when bringing a case under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act for...more

Cozen O'Connor

Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services

Cozen O'Connor on

In a unanimous opinion, the Supreme Court of the United States announced that Title VII’s protections against discrimination do not require majority group individuals (including white people, men, and heterosexuals) to...more

Holland & Knight LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Holds No Higher Standard for "Majority Group" Discrimination Claims

Holland & Knight LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision on June 5, 2025, resolving a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit split in the matter of Ames v. Ohio Dep't. of Youth Servs., 605 U.S. ____ (2025). The Supreme Court...more

Stark & Stark

United States Supreme Court Holds Same Standard Must be Applied to Reverse Discrimination Cases as Other Forms of Discrimination

Stark & Stark on

On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court unanimously held that a Plaintiff alleging reverse discrimination under Title VII be held to the same standard as if they belonged to another suspect class. Ames v. Ohio Dep’t of Youth...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

Justices Reject Higher Standard for “Reverse Discrimination” Claims

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The United States Supreme Court has held that the evidentiary standards for “reverse discrimination” claims under federal employment law must be the same as those set for claims brought by members of minority groups....more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Supreme Court’s E.M.D. Sales v. Carrera Decision: A Victory for Employers Navigating FLSA Exemptions

Foley & Lardner LLP on

A January 15, 2025, U.S. Supreme Court opinion brought welcome news for employers defending claims of worker exempt status misclassification under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). In the case at issue, E.M.D. Sales, Inc....more

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

Supreme Court Expresses Skepticism Over Higher Burden in Majority Discrimination Cases

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

The Supreme Court of the United States recently heard oral arguments in a case to determine whether employees who are part of a majority group must meet a higher standard to prove discrimination....more

Tucker Arensberg, P.C.

U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies Lower Burden for Employer to Prove FLSA Overtime Exemption

Tucker Arensberg, P.C. on

The Supreme Court recently clarified that an employer seeking to prove an exemption from overtime requirements under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) must meet the “preponderance of the evidence” standard, and not the...more

Mintz - Employment Viewpoints

Employer Win on FLSA Exemption Issue – Heightened Pleading Standard Rejected by High Court

Mintz - Employment Viewpoints on

The United States Supreme Court recently held in E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera that the “preponderance of the evidence” burden of proof applies in determining whether an employee is exempt under the federal Fair Labor...more

Cole Schotz

U.S. Supreme Court Issues Key Decision on FLSA Burden of Proof

Cole Schotz on

On January 15, 2025, the United States Supreme Court ruled in E.M.D. Sales, Inc., et al. v. Carrera et al., that the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (the “FLSA”) exemptions do not require a heightened burden of proof. The decision...more

Benesch

US Supreme Court Clarifies That FLSA Worker Exemption Disputes Should Be Determined on a Preponderance-of-the-Evidence Evidentiary...

Benesch on

On January 15, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the Fourth Circuit’s attempt to require an employer to meet a higher evidentiary standard to establish that its workers fell under one of the Fair Labor Standards Act...more

BakerHostetler

SCOTUS Rules FLSA Classification Does Not Require Higher Evidence Standard

BakerHostetler on

On Wednesday, January 15, 2025, in a unanimous opinion, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the preponderance of the evidence standard is the appropriate standard for courts to apply to overtime exemption...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Supreme Court to Hear Reverse Discrimination Appeal

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on

A few months ago, we published an alert noting that the U.S. Supreme Court had agreed to hear Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services. The case addresses whether plaintiffs alleging reverse discrimination under Title VII...more

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

Employers Need Only Use ‘Preponderance of Evidence’ Test to Show Workers Are Exempt From FLSA, Supreme Court Rules

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

On January 15, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States held that employers need only demonstrate that an employee is exempt from the minimum wage and overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) by a...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

U.S. Supreme Court Makes Clear There Is No Heightened Standard for Employers to Establish an FLSA Exemption Applies

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

Employers do not have to meet a heightened standard of proof to establish that an employee is exempt from the minimum wage and overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the U.S. Supreme Court held...more

Hinshaw & Culbertson - Consumer Financial...

Consumer Law Hinsights – July 2020

Hinshaw & Culbertson - Consumer Financial... on

Welcome to Consumer Law Hinsights?a monthly compilation of nationwide consumer protection cases of interest to financial services and accounts receivable management companies. This edition highlights our interactive COVID-19...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court - March, 2017 #4

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued a decision in the following case today: Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman, No. 15-1391: Five businesses in New York, petitioners here, wanted to pass along the...more

22 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