738 results for 'cat:"Employment Discrimination" AND cat:"Employment Retaliation"'.
J. Moss denies, in part, a feminist organization's motion for summary judgment on its former vice president's claims arising from her removal from office. There are genuine issues of fact regarding her claims for race discrimination, hostile work environment and retaliation, among others.
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Moss, Filed On: January 22, 2024, Case #: 1:19cv3845, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Borden grants summary judgment in favor of Mercedes-Benz in this employment dispute brought by a former employee who is a Black female alleging discrimination and retaliation due to her age, race and gender. The former employee did not address the age discrimination in Mercedes-Benz summary judgment motion, the court deems this to be abandoned. The opposition brief shows the stated reason for termination with no circumstantial evidence of race and gender discrimination or retaliation.
Court: USDC Northern District of Alabama , Judge: Borden, Filed On: January 22, 2024, Case #: 7:21cv1618, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Xinis grants, in part, Walmart’s motion to dismiss the employment dispute brought by a former Black male employee alleging race discrimination, sexual harassment, workplace assault and harassment, negligent supervision and retention, emotional distress, and retaliation. The former employee fails to plausibly connect the reallocation of his job duties to his use of administrative remedies on the sexual harassment and retaliation claims, and fails to make a plausible claim for the other claims. The former employee has 21 days to file an amended complaint and Walmart has 14 days after the filing to respond.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Xinis, Filed On: January 22, 2024, Case #: 8:23cv1131, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Emotional Distress, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Dever grants the City of Raleigh’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint of a former training and development analyst who brought allegations of sexual harassment, gender discrimination and retaliation against it. The analyst claims that her male supervisor stared at and touched her breasts and made inappropriate comments such as, “You’re buttering the wrong bread. I’m the one you need to talk to if you want to get what you need.” The analyst complained to human resources, and even though an investigation found her claims to be true, she was fired. She filed for her right to sue with the EEOC too late, however, and it was time-barred, so she cannot proceed.
Court: USDC Eastern District of North Carolina, Judge: Dever, Filed On: January 22, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv49, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Duffin partially grants the public schools district officials' motion to dismiss a lawsuit from a former employee claiming she was targeted for retaliation and discrimination as a white woman because she opposed the promotion of an unqualified Black male to the position of chief academic officer. The employee's claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and a Wisconsin labor statute are dismissed, as are her constitutional claims against the district and members of the district's board of directors in their official capacities. Her federal-law race and sex discrimination claims, public records claims against the district and the board, and a First Amendment claim against one board member in her individual capacity survive the motion to dismiss.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Wisconsin, Judge: Duffin, Filed On: January 19, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv948, NOS: Fair Labor Standards Act - Labor, Categories: Due Process, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
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 Free
J. Valderrama partially grants a labor union’s motion for summary judgment on one of its former business agents’ race discrimination, harassment and retaliation claims. The union fired the business agent on the basis that it discovered he had a disqualifying felony record, but the agent himself argued this was pretextual and that the actual reason he was fired was because he is Black and complained about his coworkers’ racist attitudes. The court finds there is insufficient evidence to support the agent’s race discrimination and retaliation claims, but allows his racial harassment claim to go forward.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Valderrama, Filed On: January 19, 2024, Case #: 119cv3351, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation, Labor / Unions
J. Wood finds in favor of the employer in a race discrimination and retaliation action brought by the former employee, a Black man, after he was fired for willful destruction of company property for spilling paint on the floor of a manufactured home. The ex-employee failed to provide a specific comparator to show that the employer treated similarly situated employees outside his protected class more favorably. The ex-employee also failed to show that the employer's nondiscriminatory reason for firing him was pretextual.
Court: USDC Southern District of Georgia, Judge: Wood, Filed On: January 18, 2024, Case #: 5:22cv73, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Mullen grants an initial review of a former hotel worker’s allegations that a hotel refused to rehire him due to his age and because he had previously complained about being subject to racism. The hotel laid off the worker, a Black man who had filed an EEOC complaint in the past, during the Covid-19 pandemic and then would not rehire him while it rehired younger staff members. The worker’s claims have been found not to be frivolous, so he may proceed.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Mullen, Filed On: January 16, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv843, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Ray partially grants the ex-police officer's motion to exclude expert testimony in a race discrimination and employment retaliation action against the mayor and the police chief arising after he was fired. The expert, who is also a police chief, may not offer legal conclusions, tell the jury what result to reach or opine as to what legal authority city policies or practices bestow on the police chief. The expert can talk about how industry customs and practices are shaped by legal requirements. The police chief's motion to preclude certain opinions from the ex-police officer's expert law enforcement officials is denied.
Court: USDC Southern District of Georgia, Judge: Ray, Filed On: January 12, 2024, Case #: 4:21cv111, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Experts, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Cogburn grants Amazon’s motion for summary judgment following allegations of gender and disability discrimination and retaliation brought by a former associate after she sustained an injury at work. The associate hit her head on a video monitor and got treatment from Amazon’s medical staff in the form of over-the-counter medicine and ice. Although the staff and two other medical professionals approved the associate to return to work, she claimed she had a note from her own doctor stating she could not, although she never produced said note. Despite Amazon warning her they would fire her if she continued to no-call no-show, she continued to not come in for work for at least four days. She fails to present sufficient evidence of either discrimination or retaliation, and Amazon’s firing was legitimate because she violated the attendance policy.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Cogburn, Filed On: January 12, 2024, Case #: 3:21cv627, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Axon grants, in part, the county’s motion to dismiss this employment dispute brought by a former employee alleging gender, sex, age and disability discrimination and retaliation. In the former employee’s amended complaint, she did not allege gender or sex discrimination and requested punitive damages. Therefore, the gender or sex discrimination and requested punitive damages are dismissed. All of the remaining motion to dismiss claims are denied and will continue with proceedings.
Court: USDC Northern District of Alabama , Judge: Axon, Filed On: January 12, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv62, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Johnson grants the defendant company's motion for summary judgment in this lawsuit brought by a former employee who was allegedly terminated after asking for leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act to care for a family member. The record indicates that the employee "repeatedly" violated the company's absence policy and often "failed to provide notification to his employer of his anticipated and actual absences." Accordingly, the employer has sufficiently shown that he would have been terminated anyway, even without the request for leave.
Court: USDC Northern District of Oklahoma , Judge: Johnson, Filed On: January 10, 2024, Case #: 4:20cv229, NOS: Family and Medical Leave Act - Labor, Categories: employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Boyle denies a North Carolina justice department employee’s motion for reconsideration after the department was granted its partial motion to dismiss her discrimination allegations. Because the employee did not amend her complaint after, for instance, claiming she found post-dismissal evidence of the department’s retaliation, her arguments for reconsideration are misplaced.
Court: USDC Eastern District of North Carolina, Judge: Boyle, Filed On: January 10, 2024, Case #: 5:21cv371, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Discovery, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Dever partially grants a school board’s motion to dismiss allegations of civil rights violations brought by a former assistant principal. The assistant principal, a white man, argues that he was subject to systematic racial harassment and race and sex discrimination, specifically by the school’s superintendent, as evidenced by things like not promoting him and not providing him functioning equipment when testing students. The assistant principal’s retaliation claims against the board and superintendent survive as he was able to prove he engaged in protected activity and leave just before he was suspended without pay, then fired. However, his discrimination claims fail because his comparisons of treatment between himself and Black employees were not sufficient.
Court: USDC Eastern District of North Carolina, Judge: Dever, Filed On: January 8, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv30, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Higginson finds the district court properly found for a university on a black administrative coordinator's sexual harassment and retaliation suit. The record demonstrates the university took prompt remedial action after an investigation supported her claim that a veterinarian had slapped her on the buttocks. Furthermore, she fails to show the university's reasons for relocating her were pretextual. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Higginson , Filed On: January 8, 2024, Case #: 22-30699, Categories: Education, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Urbanski denies the jail's motion to dismiss a sex discrimination claim. The correctional officer sufficiently pled that despite her receiving a reprimand for her part, her male counterparts were not disciplined for a verbal confrontation, that she made lower pay than seven of her male coworkers and was fired for fewer reasons than males.
Court: USDC Western District of Virginia, Judge: Urbanski, Filed On: January 8, 2024, Case #: 5:22cv57, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation