741 results for 'cat:"Employment Discrimination" AND cat:"Employment Retaliation"'.
J. Walton grants summary judgment to the employer in the employee's case alleging disability discrimination and retaliation. While the employee has administratively exhausted his Rehabilitation Act claim, he has not established a prima facie case of discrimination since there is no evidence in the record to support his allegation that, with accommodations, he was able to perform the essential functions of his position and he failed to make his request for situational telework in advance sufficient to devise an appropriate work plan. He also has not administratively exhausted a hostile work environment claim, nor met his burden of proof for remaining retaliation claims.
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Walton, Filed On: May 31, 2024, Case #: 1:17cv2398, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Munley denies an ambulance service's and supervisor's motion to dismiss a paramedic's employment discrimination, harassment and assault claims.
The employee's assertations that the ambulance provider's president never identified or disciplined anyone for urinating on her bed, despite having sole access to live camera footage, is sufficient to support her claims.
Court: USDC Middle District of Pennsylvania, Judge: Munley, Filed On: May 30, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv2019, NOS: Civil Rights - Habeas Corpus, Categories: Civil Rights, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Dever partially denies the North Carolina Department of Transportation's motion to dismiss allegations of retaliation and hostile workplace brought by a former administrative specialist. Although the specialist claims to having been berated repeatedly by her supervisor, this does not meet the criteria for a hostile workplace under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. However, after she repeatedly complained about someone tampering with her desk lock, the department allegedly subjected her to a psychological evaluation, so her ADEA retaliation claim will proceed.
Court: USDC Eastern District of North Carolina, Judge: Dever, Filed On: May 30, 2024, Case #: 5:23cv702, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Cronan grants Starbucks' motion to compel arbitration in an employment discrimination and retaliation suit filed by a barista. The barista claims he does not recall signing the arbitration agreement, but that is insufficient to create a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he signed the document, particularly given that he admits to filling out electronic paperwork when he was hired.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Cronan, Filed On: May 28, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv6951, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Arbitration, 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. Walton partially grants the employer's motion to dismiss its former employee's suit alleging violations of the Family Medical Leave Act, race, color, disability and sex discrimination and retaliation. The employee lacks a cause of action under the FMLA, and the only appropriate defendant for her Title VII and rehabilitation act claims is the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. Of these claims, only one claim, for retaliation, is plausibly alleged. Claims alleging a hostile work environment also fail, but a retaliation claim under the Rehabilitation Act survives.
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Walton, Filed On: May 24, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv2748, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court properly declined to vacate an arbitration award granted for employment discrimination and retaliation under the Federal Arbitration Act. The arbitrator clearly analyzed the evidence in a detailed and typical way and was not required to address every possible theory of discrimination. The retaliation claim comes down to credibility determinations that should generally not be reviewed on appeal. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: May 21, 2024, Case #: 02788, Categories: Arbitration, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Coulson grants summary judgment in favor of a logistics company in this employment dispute brought by a former employee alleging violations of Title VII and the Americans with Disabilities Act. The employee fails provide sufficient evidence of an adverse action on he claims of race discrimination, retaliation and a hostile work environment, he also could not support his claim of unlawful discrimination under the ADA.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Coulson, Filed On: May 21, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv3112, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
Per curiam, the circuit finds the district court properly granted summary judgment to the employer. The employee resigned and filed suit for failure to accommodate her disability - a diagnosed anxiety disorder - after being subjected to stalking, cyberstalking and harassment by the girlfriend of one of her co-workers. The employee did not notify the employer of her disability until later, at which point it was accommodated. Certain employer actions were isolated incidents, insufficient to establish a hostile work environment, and the employee did not properly plead retaliation and constructive discharge, raising those claims first in her response to the summary judgment motion. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: May 21, 2024, Case #: 21-20547, Categories: employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Donnelly preserves on a motion to dismiss an employment retaliation lawsuit against New York City which alleges a retired Chinese assistant warden who worked at a city prison was stripped of his overtime privileges and subjected to various other retaliatory acts after the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued a finding substantiating his claims for race discrimination. The court rules that, while the alleged individual acts of retaliation themselves would have not been enough, taken together as a whole they establish an inference of retaliation.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Donnelly, Filed On: May 17, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv5268, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Hunt partially grants all parties’ motion for summary judgment in this case between the defendant construction company and the plaintiff, its former IT employee. The former employee claims he was passed over for promotion because he is Latino, and fired because he threatened to go to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission over the racist treatment he faced. The company in turn accuses the former employee of accessing other coworkers’ emails without authorization. The court rules in favor of the company on the former employee’s failure to promote and retaliatory counterclaim allegations, but in favor of the former employee on the company’s breach of contract claims. The former employee’s retaliatory termination claim will proceed to trial, though the court also denies his motion for sanctions.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Hunt, Filed On: May 16, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv2624, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Sanctions, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Whitney partially grants an insurance company and a sheriff their motions for summary judgment following gender discrimination and retaliation allegations brought by a former staff member at the sheriff’s office. In her opposition to the company’s and sheriff’s motions, the staff member makes no mention of the company nor her retaliation claim, apparently abandoning them both. As to these claims, summary judgment is granted. However, as to her gender discrimination claim against the sheriff, there are still genuine issues of fact, so summary judgment is denied.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Whitney, Filed On: May 15, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv246, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Alvarez finds that an employee who claimed that his employer discriminated against him based on his age and race has not provided sufficient evidence of constructive termination. The employee was moved to another position after he complained about harassment from other workers. The employee claimed that the move and the performance plan that the employer placed him on was a discriminatory attempt to motivate him to quit. However, because the employee performed well in the new position, it was the same pay and there is no indication that it was a demotion there is no basis for constructive termination. The employer’s motion for summary judgment is granted.
Court: USDC Southern District of Texas, Judge: Alvarez, Filed On: May 15, 2024, Case #: 7:23cv102, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Delgado-Colon denies Southwest's motion to dismiss the retaliation claim filed by a black, female, non-Spanish-speaking employee working in Puerto Rico who made several administrative complaints alleging racial discrimination. She sufficiently alleges she was suspended and later terminated after complaining to her supervisor of discrimination, supporting claims of retaliation.
Court: USDC Puerto Rico, Judge: Delgado-Colon, Filed On: May 15, 2024, Case #: 3:21cv1328, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Austin grants the mining business' motion for summary judgment as to the employee's sexual harassment claim only. The female truck driver alleges a driver she was assigned to ride with during training sexually harassed and assaulted her, and also claims a shovel operator made a sexist comment and urinated in front of her. Disciplinary action was taken after she reported the events, though she was eventually terminated after passing performance evaluations and she received complaints from other workers regarding her unsafe habits. Because appropriate action was taken upon the driver's reports of harassment, the evidence supports summary judgment. However, evidence the driver complained of harassment only two and a half months prior to termination supports the conclusion that a reasonable jury could find the company retaliated against her.
Court: USDC South Carolina Aiken, Judge: Austin, Filed On: May 15, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv3328, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Hanen finds that an employee, who claims that his employer discriminated against him for based on a disability when the employer fired the employee after he requested accommodation that would allow him not to wear a mask because of his asthma, has not proven that this was the cause of his termination. The employer presented evidence that the employee was terminated for a separate incident of insubordination and the employee has not met his burden to prove that there was a mixed motive or that the motive was related to the mask mandate. The employer’s motion for summary judgment is granted.
Court: USDC Southern District of Texas, Judge: Hanen, Filed On: May 14, 2024, Case #: 4:21cv3324, NOS: Amer w/Disabilities-Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Proctor denies, in part, the board of trustees, an employee relations representative and an administrative employee’s motion for summary judgment in this employment dispute stemming from a former research scientist from Iran alleging discrimination, harassment and retaliation after she was arrested for an altercation with a supervisor. She alleges racial and national origin harassment and retaliation claims. She fails to exhaust her administrative prerequisites or presented enough evidence making her discrimination and harassment claims viable against the board, but the termination is an adverse action that sustains her retaliation claims.
Court: USDC Northern District of Alabama , Judge: Proctor, Filed On: May 14, 2024, Case #: 2:21cv1302, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation