1,945 results for 'nos:"Employment - Civil Rights"'.
J. Shubb grants the employer $11,314 in costs after defeating the employee's claims under the Fair Employment and Housing Act and Americans with Disabilities Act. Because reimbursement of costs "is generally considered a procedural matter," federal law controls. Therefore, the employee does not need to show that the employee's claims were frivolous in order to be awarded its bill of costs.
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Shubb, Filed On: August 9, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv2128, NOS: Amer w/Disabilities-Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, Employment, Attorney Fees
J. Calabretta declines to remand a putative wage-and-hour class action. The employer has provided reasonable estimations for the potential number of class members and the violation rate for each of the employee's claims, leading to an amount in controversy of more than $7 million, which is well over the $5 million jurisdictional threshold.
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Calabretta, Filed On: August 9, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv2564, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, Jurisdiction, Class Action
J. Lake adopts the magistrate’s recommendations, dismissing this employment and race discrimination suit by a former Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent against agency higher-ups. The agency moved for dismissal because the former agent sued the wrong defendants and failed to contact a counselor of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission within 45 days of his resignation.
Court: USDC Southern District of Texas, Judge: Lake, Filed On: August 9, 2024, Case #: 4:23cv2593, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Procedure, 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. Currault grants requests by several hospital employees of a skilled nursing facility, dismissing them from an age, race and retaliation suit brought by a former nursing supervisor against their employer. Her civil rights and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims do not contain sufficient facts for a plausible claim. Likewise her allegations of disability bias and whistleblower claims against the named individuals should be dismissed because individual liability is not available under those claims.
Court: USDC Western District of Louisiana , Judge: Currault, Filed On: August 9, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv2433, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Health Care, Employment Retaliation
[Amended.] J. Ellison dismisses state libel and defamation claims by a former firefighter against a city employee who drafted a memo calling the firefighter’s religious beliefs “insincere” as reason to deny his request for religious accommodation for his facial hair. The city official who drafted the memo is entitled to official immunity because the memo was drafted in the course of his employment, and the defamation claims could have been brought against just the city itself as a state tort. The firefighter’s employment discrimination claims against the city remain.
Court: USDC Southern District of Texas, Judge: Ellison, Filed On: August 8, 2024, Case #: 4:23cv4777, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Procedure, Defamation, Employment Discrimination
J. Donnelly tosses a whistleblower retaliation and employment discrimination lawsuit against New York City’s education department which allege school officials subjected two self-represented special education teachers to a hostile work environment, one of whom was allegedly forced to retire early, after they filed complaints with authorities citing violations of health, safety and special education regulations. The court finds their claims vague, conclusory and, in some cases, time-barred.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Donnelly, Filed On: August 8, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv2928, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Education, Employment
J. Coogler approves a class of former employees’ settlement agreement against a poultry company in this employment dispute, awarding attorney fees over $1 million, and $65,000 in costs to the employees’ counsel.
Court: USDC Northern District of Alabama , Judge: Coogler, Filed On: August 8, 2024, Case #: 6:18cv1433, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, Attorney Fees, Class Action
J. Menendez dismisses the employee's suit alleging that she was fired for refusing to wear a mask to work as a nurse during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic. The employee has not administratively exhausted her religious-discrimination claims, and her other claims fail because the employer is not a state actor and she has not identified a viable private right of action under HIPAA. A motion for sanctions against the employee is denied, since given her pro se status, her claims were not objectively unreasonable.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Menendez, Filed On: August 8, 2024, Case #: 0:23cv3901, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, Sanctions, Covid-19
J. Shubb declines to dismiss the crime analyst's complaint alleging that her supervisor in the San Joaquin County Sheriff's Office sent images of his erect penis while in uniform to her, sexually assaulted her on multiple occasions, and then threatened to fire her if she reported his conduct. The crime analyst sufficiently pleads a Monell claim under a customary failure to discipline theory based on her allegations that the supervisor was never disciplined and he was not the only deputy in the office known to have accosted women on the job.
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Shubb, Filed On: August 7, 2024, Case #: 2:24cv899, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Employment
J. Simms denies, in part, a former employee's motion for sanctions in this employment dispute against her employer. The employee claims race discrimination based on her skin color leading to her termination, but clear convincing evidence was not presented. She can file a motion to address alleged misconduct by the employer during the discovery process.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Simms, Filed On: August 7, 2024, Case #: 8:18cv3405, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Evidence, Discovery, Employment Discrimination
J. Merchant trims a class action lawsuit against Nassau County alleging its county police department’s hiring process discriminates against non-white applicants which has led to a disproportionate number of white officers in its ranks. The case was brought by a Black man who claims he was disqualified from becoming a police officer due to several traffic-related infractions that were discovered during a background check while white applicants with much more troubling records were accepted. The court finds he suffered personal harm only as a result of the background check phase of the hiring process and preserves the claims that relate only to that phase of the process.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Merchant, Filed On: August 6, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv7023, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, Employment Discrimination, Class Action
J. Vratil grants a board of public utilities' motion for summary judgment concerning a former employee's discrimination and retaliation claims. The public utilities board does not typically allow employees to work from home, and the Black employee fails to present evidence that the employer mistreated other Black workers, as well.
Court: USDC Kansas, Judge: Vratil, Filed On: August 6, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv2248, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, Employment Discrimination, Employment Retaliation
J. Cogburn rules that, under the terms of the settlement, IHOP and its employees may not discriminate against any employee on the basis of religion and must accommodate its employees’ religious observations. The company must also pay $40,000 to the employee who sued them for religious discrimination, and it must implement new training and reporting policies.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Cogburn, Filed On: August 6, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv274, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, Settlements, Employment Discrimination
J. Dever grants a security company’s partial motion to dismiss a former employee’s state-law claims of disability discrimination and retaliation. Because his federal claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the state-law claims deal with the same facts and allegations, the employee cannot pursue his state law claims simultaneously. Moreover, the employee failed to provide a right-to-sue letter from the North Carolina Commissioner of Labor, and thus failed to exhaust his administrative remedies before filing a retaliation claim under state law.
Court: USDC Eastern District of North Carolina, Judge: Dever, Filed On: August 6, 2024, Case #: 5:23cv547, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment Discrimination, Employment Retaliation, Labor
J. Flanagan partially grants a town’s motion to dismiss an employment discrimination suit by a former firefighter who refused to take the Covid-19 vaccine on religious grounds. The firefighter’s claims satisfy all three requirements to allege religious discrimination under Title VII, and the town failed to present a compelling interest for interfering with his First Amendment rights to free speech and free exercise of religion. But his equal protection claim fails because “there is no fundamental right to refuse vaccination,” vaccination status is not a protected class under the equal protection clause, and he did not make an equal protection claim on religious grounds.
Court: USDC Eastern District of North Carolina, Judge: Flanagan, Filed On: August 6, 2024, Case #: 5:23cv663, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Covid-19, Employment Discrimination, Employment Retaliation
J. Lindsay accepts the recommendations of a magistrate judge in an employment discrimination lawsuit. A former city employee is suing Dallas, Texas, claiming she was paid unequally because of her race, denied accommodations for disabilities and retaliated against for filing a prior Americans with Disabilities Act lawsuit. The court accepts the magistrate judge’s recommendation that the employee not be allowed to present testimony from physicians not included in her expert designations. The court also accepts the magistrate’s recommendation that the testimony of the physician she did list be limited to personal knowledge he obtained from treating her, as the physician did not file an expert report. The court accepts the magistrate judge’s recommendation that the employee not be allowed to supplement her expert designations, as letting her do so would unfairly burden the city by prolonging the trial process. “At some point, justice delayed is justice denied whether on the part of the plaintiff or a defendant to litigation.”
Court: USDC Northern District of Texas , Judge: Lindsay, Filed On: August 6, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv1477, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, Experts, Employment Discrimination