Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for FreeJ. Biran answers questions of law from the lower court concerning a data analyst’s suit against a Catholic charitable organization after it offered, then retracted, the analyst’s husband benefits because the couple is gay. State law distinguishes between the protected classes of “sex” and “sexual orientation;” they are not synonymous. Therefore, the analyst would have to sue the organization specifically in terms of his sexual orientation.
To read this case, start your 14-day free trial.
Request a free trial account to get access to more case data, documents, and features.
To provide the best experiences, we and our partners use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us and our partners to process personal data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site and show (non-) personalized ads. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Click below to consent to the above or make granular choices. Your choices will be applied to this site only. You can change your settings at any time, including withdrawing your consent, by using the toggles on the Cookie Policy, or by clicking on the manage consent button at the bottom of the screen.