News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Summary Judgment

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 -
Potomac Law Group, PLLC

SCOTUS Rejects Unique Proof Standards for Reverse Discrimination Plaintiffs

Potomac Law Group, PLLC on

On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, holding that courts may not impose heightened evidentiary requirements on Title VII plaintiffs simply because...more

Snell & Wilmer

United States Supreme Court Rejects Heightened Prima Facie Standard for “Majority” Plaintiffs in Title VII Cases

Snell & Wilmer on

A unanimous Supreme Court decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services clarified that Title VII plaintiffs who are members of a majority group have the same standard for establishing their claim as a plaintiff who is...more

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

U.S. Supreme Court denies cert in bank receiver case

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP on

On June 16, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a bank holding company’s petition for certiorari after the Tenth Circuit upheld summary judgment in a bank receivership matter that was granted by a lower court in favor of the State...more

McGlinchey Stafford

SCOTUS Ames Decision: Everyone’s in a “Protected Class”

McGlinchey Stafford on

In employment law, we traditionally think of discrimination as applying to minority groups: African Americans, women, homosexuals, or other legally protected groups. In analyzing discrimination claims, one of the first...more

Littler

Supreme Court Holds ADA and Rehabilitation Act Lawsuits Against Public Schools Need Not Clear Higher Bar

Littler on

On June 12, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools that students bringing Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Rehabilitation Act lawsuits against public schools should not face a...more

Clark Hill PLC

SCOTUS’s Ames Decision Provides a Roadmap for Title IX Lawsuits Brought by Male Plaintiffs

Clark Hill PLC on

In Ames v. Ohio Dep’t of Youth Servs., No. 23-1039, 2025 WL 1583264 (U.S. June 5, 2025), the Supreme Court held unanimously that the “background circumstances” rule imposed by some lower courts, requiring members of a...more

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer

The Supreme Court rejects a heightened summary judgment standard for majority group plaintiffs in Title VII discrimination cases

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer on

On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Ames v Ohio Dept. of Youth Services that plaintiffs in the majority group within a protected class have the same burden of proof at summary judgment to demonstrate...more

K&L Gates LLP

Supreme Court Invalidates "Background Circumstances" Rule in Title VII Cases

K&L Gates LLP on

On 5 June 2025, the Supreme Court ruled in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services that, in order to establish a Title VII claim, a plaintiff who is a member of a “majority group” is not required to show “background...more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

Justice Thomas continues to ask litigants to challenge McDonnell Douglas standard

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP on

In March, the U.S. Supreme Court majority declined to review a decision affirming summary judgment for an employer in a discrimination case. Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, dissented, noting that he...more

ArentFox Schiff

Supreme Court Resolves Conflict on Burden for ‘Reverse’ Discrimination Claims

ArentFox Schiff on

In Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, No. 23-1039 (S. Ct. June 5, 2025), the US Supreme Court unanimously dispelled the concept of “reverse” discrimination, making clear that discrimination on the basis of a protected...more

Jones Day

U.S. Supreme Court Encourages Federal Rule 7(a)(7) Replies—A Potential Boon for Defendants

Jones Day on

The U.S. Supreme Court recently reminded district courts that they may use Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7(a)(7)—a little-known rule—to screen out meritless complaints before discovery....more

Wiley Rein LLP

Supreme Court Blocks Mexico’s Gun Lawsuit: PLCAA Shields U.S. Firearm Makers from Litigation

Wiley Rein LLP on

On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court held unanimously, in Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos, that the gun-manufacturer and gun-distributor defendants sued by Mexico for negligence and related torts...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Supreme Court Rejects Heightened Prima Facie “Background Circumstances” Test for Majority Group Plaintiffs

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court vacated the dismissal of a heterosexual woman’s Title VII claims, concluding that she was improperly subjected to a heightened prima facie standard that required her to show...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

U.S. Supreme Court Reverses ‘Reverse’ Employment Discrimination Pleading Standard

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated the “background circumstances” rule in “reverse” employment discrimination claims brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act in a unanimous decision overturning...more

Epstein Becker & Green

Justices Reject “Moment of Threat” Rule in Police Shooting Case - SCOTUS Today

Epstein Becker & Green on

The most anticipated event at the U.S. Supreme Court today was the oral argument in the birthright citizenship case....more

Baker Botts L.L.P.

Write it Down or Forever Hold Your Peace: Texas Supreme Court Rejects Fraud Claims Based on Oral Representations in Mineral Deals

Baker Botts L.L.P. on

On Friday, May 9th, the Supreme Court of Texas addressed important issues regarding the enforcement of written contractual representations in its per curiam opinion styled Roxo Energy Co., LLC et al. v. Baxsto, LLC, ---...more

Polsinelli

Supreme Court Revives ERISA Litigation Dismissed in Second Circuit: Will the Supreme Court’s Adoption of a Liberal Pleading...

Polsinelli on

On Thursday, April 17, a unanimous Supreme Court held that a less demanding pleading standard is applicable when plaintiffs bring an Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) class action under ERISA Section...more

McGlinchey Stafford

Litigation Byte (April 2025 Edition)

McGlinchey Stafford on

Delivered in digestible, insightful bites, McGlinchey’s Litigation Byte is a monthly roundup of financial services decisions and cases nationwide that impact your business....more

Maynard Nexsen

Navigating Increased ERISA Litigation Risk Post-Cunningham: How to Protect Your Plan

Maynard Nexsen on

Under the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Cunningham v. Cornell University, No. 23-1007 (April 17, 2025), plaintiffs asserting that ERISA plan administrators engaged in prohibited transactions under ERISA Section 406 are...more

Proskauer - Employee Benefits & Executive...

Supreme Court Establishes Lower Pleading Standard for Prohibited Transaction Claims

Proskauer - Employee Benefits & Executive... on

In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Cunningham v. Cornell University that plaintiffs can satisfy the requirements for pleading prohibited party-in interest transactions under ERISA section 406(a) without...more

Maynard Nexsen

Burden at the Crossroads: Pizarro Paves the Way for Potential Supreme Court Review

Maynard Nexsen on

ERISA breach of fiduciary duty class actions have surged in recent years, prompting courts to grapple with complex questions about how these claims should be pleaded and litigated. Among the most consequential and unresolved...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Supreme Court Rejects Challenge to McDonnell Douglas Discrimination Claims Analysis

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on

Since 1973, federal courts reviewing claims of employment discrimination have used a framework first established by the U.S. Supreme Court’s McDonnell Douglas decision. Under this framework, plaintiffs must show a prima facie...more

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace

U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument in Reverse Sex Discrimination Case

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace on

On February 26, 2025, the United States Supreme Court entertained oral argument in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, a case that centered on whether a plaintiff who is a member of a majority group must meet a higher...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Amending Away Federal Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Holds That Federal Jurisdiction Can Be Divested by Amendment

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

Federal courts can adjudicate state-law claims arising out of the same facts as federal-law claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367, but what happens if, after removal, the plaintiff amends her complaint to remove the federal questions...more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

A sneak peek at what a religious accommodation trial might look like for a guy who can't work Sundays

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP on

After the case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, on January 30 a federal district court denied dueling motions for summary judgment filed by Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, the U.S. Postal Service, and former Postal...more

164 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 7
Next »

"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