2,131 results for 'cat:"Employment Discrimination"'.
J. Bennett grants the police department’s motion to dismiss this employment dispute brought by a former Black police officer alleging race discrimination, hostile work environment, retaliation, Monell, and violations of civil rights and the Maryland Fair Employment Practice Act. The police department alleges the employee failed to exhaust her administrative remedies and her complaint is time-barred after an investigation was opened on her for a fight while off-duty. The court finds her EEOC charge was filed in timely manner, her Title VII claims appear to be time-barred. Her complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, but she has 15 days to file an amended complaint.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Bennett, Filed On: May 8, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv2215, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, Employment Retaliation
J. Quereshi denies, in part, the United States Department of Treasury and a supervisor in this employment dispute brought by a former employee claiming national origin discrimination, retaliation, hostile work environment and constructive discharge. She alleges numerous times she was assigned more work than other coworkers, ignored, criticized, insulted by her supervisors and not selected for promotions before her forced retirement. The employee is granted leave to file an amended complaint with the appropriate details of her discrimination, hostile work environment and constructive discharge claims.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Quereshi, Filed On: May 8, 2024, Case #: 8:23cv1699, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, Employment Retaliation
J. Kness partially grants the Illinois Department of Corrections’ motion for summary judgment on an older Black employee’s claims of age and race discrimination, and retaliation for union association. The employee, who oversees several parole officers, claims his spotty disciplinary record with the department is the result of systemic ageism and anti-Black racism and departmental retaliation for his efforts to unionize his office. The court finds most of the employee’s discrimination claims either untimely or lacking sufficient evidence, but also finds there is sufficient evidence to support his claim for union activity retaliation against several specific department personnel.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Kness, Filed On: May 8, 2024, Case #: 1:18cv282, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, Employment Retaliation, Labor / Unions
J. Johnson denies summary judgment to a maintenance company on its argument a black employee’s racial bias claim should be dismissed. His supervisor allegedly referred to him with racist profanity with another employee outside the litigant’s presence. The Fifth Circuit recognizes that while "a single instance of a racial epithet does not, in itself, support a claim of hostile work environment,” perhaps “no single act can more quickly alter the conditions of employment and create an abusive working environment than the use of an unambiguously racial epithet such as [the N-word] by a supervisor in the presence of his subordinates.”
Court: USDC Middle District of Louisiana, Judge: Johnson, Filed On: May 8, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv560, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Evidence, employment Discrimination, Labor
J. Hanks finds that an Asian American Muslim employee, who claims that his employer, a housing authority, discriminated against in their denial of his request for a hardship withdrawal from his retirement plan, has not provided sufficient evidence to survive the housing authority’s motion for dismissal. While the employee’s claims do indicate a hostile work environment the employee has not shown that the incidents are connected to the denial of his hardship withdrawal request. The employee’s claims are dismissed without prejudice.
Court: USDC Southern District of Texas, Judge: Hanks, Filed On: May 8, 2024, Case #: 4:23cv814, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Privacy, employment Discrimination
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. Moon grants the city's motion for summary judgment in an employment discrimination suit. A female firefighter sued the city, claiming she experienced discriminatory treatment from her superiors and that her superiors opened a retaliatory investigation into her conduct, resulting in her demotion. There is no evidence of her employers treating male coworkers differently; they, too, are required to provide a doctor's note if taking sick leave, and there is no evidence of them making statements about women not belonging in the fire service. A feeling of disrespect is not a substitute for evidence of discriminatory treatment.
Court: USDC Western District of Virginia, Judge: Moon, Filed On: May 7, 2024, Case #: 6:23cv32, Categories: employment Discrimination, Employment Retaliation
J. Halpern partially denies the school district's motion to dismiss an Ashkenazi Jewish woman's employment discrimination claims based on the denial of her request to take days off for Jewish holy days. While a hearing officer found that the woman did not engage in religious observances during this time, this determination is not a proper factual finding. While she traveled to Trinidad to visit family, the employee has plausibly pled religious discrimination based on her discipline for exercising her religious beliefs.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Halpern, Filed On: May 7, 2024, Case #: 7:23cv6202, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, employment Discrimination
J. Corker grants the former employer’s motion for summary judgment in this lawsuit alleging discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. The former employees fail to provide direct evidence of age discrimination, and they do not dispute that their terminations “occurred in the context of a workforce reduction.” Additionally, they do not show that the reasons given by the employer were pretext for discrimination.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Tennessee , Judge: Corker, Filed On: May 7, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv392, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, employment Discrimination
J. Richardson grants the defendant company’s motion for summary judgment in this case brought by a former employee asserting certain state-law employment related claims, including retaliatory discharge under the Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Law and discriminatory discharge under the Tennessee Disability Act. As to the former employee’s two claims, which both stem from his termination, the court concludes that there are no issues of fact and that the employer is “entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
Court: USDC Middle District of Tennessee , Judge: Richardson, Filed On: May 7, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv87, NOS: Other Labor Litigation - Labor, Categories: Employment, employment Discrimination, Employment Retaliation
J. Newman grants the police department's motion for summary judgment, ruling the police officer's age discrimination claim fails. The younger officer used as a comparator did not commit the same type of misconduct and, therefore, is not similarly situated, while a supervisor's single comment about "younger officers" during disciplinary proceedings does not constitute direct evidence of discrimination. Meanwhile, the retaliation claim also fails as a matter of law because the fitness for duty evaluation required before the officer could return to work was not an "adverse employment action," especially considering the officer blamed several mistakes that led to his suspension on the stress of his job.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Newman, Filed On: May 7, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv96, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, Employment Retaliation
J. Rabner finds that the appellate division improperly rejected an employee's constitutional challenge in claims contending she had been prohibited from talking about an internal sexual harassment complaint she filed against a supervisor because a duration had not been imposed upon the request that witnesses and involved parties refrain from discussing the case, and the request concerned a large swath of protected speech. Reversed.
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court, Judge: Rabner , Filed On: May 6, 2024, Case #: A-40-22, Categories: Constitution, employment Discrimination
J. AliKhan largely grants the employer's motion for summary judgment and denies the employee's cross-motion for partial summary judgment in her suit alleging that the employer failed to accommodate her disabilities and cut her hours and threatened to terminate her for taking medical leave. Summary judgment is denied to the employer as to claims related to failures to provide an ergonomic chair and desk and related to the employer's requirement that the employee recertify her FMLA leave. It is otherwise granted.
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: AliKhan, Filed On: May 3, 2024, Case #: 1:19cv1766, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, employment Discrimination, Employment Retaliation
J. Saylor denies in part several funds and their chairman’s motion for summary judgment against their former administrator who is being sued for breach of fiduciary duty and has asserted counterclaims for sexual harassment, creating a hostile work environment, retaliation for reporting harassment and failure to accommodate her Type 1 diabetes. The chairman repeatedly behaved inappropriately and made sexual comments to the administrator, such as telling her that he wanted her and had a crush on her and that his wife wasn’t taking care of him, attempting to kiss her against her will immediately after screaming and swearing at her after she gave told him his behavior made her uncomfortable, and if the breasts of an employee on medical leave for breast cancer were “any good.”
Court: USDC Massachusetts, Judge: Saylor, Filed On: May 3, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv10163, NOS: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) - Labor, Categories: Employment, employment Discrimination, Employment Retaliation
J. Rendell finds the District Court erred by misapplying the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting test and ignored certain evidence favorable to the employee's wrongful termination claim. The employer's February 2019 decision not to promote the employee happened at the first promotion opportunity following his protected activity. Reversed.
Court: 3rd Circuit, Judge: Rendell, Filed On: May 2, 2024, Case #: 23-1031, Categories: employment Discrimination
J. Self grants the mover's motion for default judgment in an employment discrimination action against the moving companies. The mover, a Black man who is Muslim, claimed that he was subjected to race- and religion-based discrimination and ultimately fired after his boss insisted in an outburst that the Quaran promoted hate and the killing of innocents. The mover exhausted his administrative remedies and sufficiently established that the companies discriminated against Black employees, including with respect to compensation. The mover is entitled to $50,000 in damages, $16,000 in attorney fees and back pay plus interest.
Court: USDC Middle District of Georgia, Judge: Self, Filed On: May 2, 2024, Case #: 5:23cv394, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Damages, employment Discrimination
J. Sargus denies Lowe's motion for summary judgment, ruling that while the store manager's poor performance gave it a legitimate reason to fire him, its decision to terminate him less than 10 days into a performance improvement plan and "shifting justifications" for his termination - including his response to a store fire while he was on vacation and the acceleration of his performance improvement timeline - would allow a reasonable jury to consider its reasons a pretext for age discrimination.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Sargus, Filed On: May 2, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv4162, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Evidence, employment Discrimination