6 results for 'cat:"Due Process" AND cat:"Employment Retaliation"'.
J. Urbanski denies the university's motion to dismiss due process claims. A Ph.D candidate claimed his male supervisor routinely discriminated against him because the supervisor preferred women he could attempt to seduce. The supervisor received a grant from research the candidate did in his lab but instead of giving the research stipend to the male candidate he gave it to a female candidate he was supposedly in a romantic relationship with. The male candidate claims that after he reported the supervisor's actions the supervisor began a retaliation campaign consisting of harsh work assignments and creating a hostile lab environment. During this time the male candidate was accused of sexual assault by a classmate who the male candidate claims did not seek to pursue the candidate's dismissal from the university until the supervisor influenced her to do so. The process moved quickly and the university, supposedly under the supervisor's tutelage, refused to give the male candidate an extension for collecting evidence to defend himself from the accusation.
Court: USDC Western District of Virginia, Judge: Urbanski, Filed On: April 2, 2024, Case #: 7:21cv378, Categories: Education, due Process, employment Retaliation
J. Boom grants the Secretary of Defense's motion to affirm the Merit Systems Protection Board’s determination that the Defense Commissary Agency lawfully terminated the employee. The employee was placed on administrative leave after allegations of sexual harassment were made against him, and consistent allegations by multiple women support the decision. The agency detailed all factors and the board thoroughly considered its analysis and the employee's arguments, and correctly concluded termination was reasonable.
Court: USDC Western District of Kentucky, Judge: Boom , Filed On: March 19, 2024, Case #: 5:22cv61, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Government, due Process, employment Retaliation
Per curiam, the circuit finds the district court improperly granted Amazon's motion to dismiss an employment discrimination claim filed by an employee who experienced exhaustion based on a task he says only men were assigned to because of its physical rigor. The court granted the motion based on failure to state a claim, being there was no ultimate employment decision at question. However, the circuit has previously held that “a plaintiff need only show that [he or] she was discriminated against, because of a protected characteristic." Vacated.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: February 20, 2024, Case #: 23-10556, Categories: due Process, 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