74 results for 'cat:"Employment" AND cat:"Whistleblowers"'.
[Consolidated.] J. Caldwell finds that the lower court improperly found for three police officers in whistleblower claims contending they suffered retaliation for reporting concerns about evidence theft because jury instructions failed to require a finding that the state police had subjected each officer to personnel actions or punishment. Reversed.
Court: Kentucky Court Of Appeals, Judge: Caldwell, Filed On: May 10, 2024, Case #: 2022-CA-1028-MR, Categories: employment, Jury, whistleblowers
J. Hunt partially grants the Chicago Board of Education’s motion to dismiss multiple civil rights claims brought by a former employee. The former employee claims the board fired him in retaliation for prior charges he brought, over the board not accommodating his disabilities. The court mostly dismisses his retaliation and ADA discrimination claims, as he had pulled a girl out of class by her wrist and school officials overheard him speaking unprofessionally about a suicidal student, but allows a portion of his claim under the Illinois Whistleblower Act to proceed.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Hunt, Filed On: April 29, 2024, Case #: 1:20cv73, NOS: Amer w/Disabilities-Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, whistleblowers, employment Retaliation
J. Ortega finds the trial court erred in dismissing an employee's claims of unlawful employment discrimination and whistleblowing. “There is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether plaintiff’s protected activity was a substantial factor in defendant’s decision to terminate his employment.” Reversed.
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals, Judge: Ortega, Filed On: April 17, 2024, Case #: A177073, Categories: employment, whistleblowers
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
[Consolidated.] J. Wooton affirms in part, and reverses in part the lower court's orders granting the university's motion for summary judgment in the two former campus police officers' suits alleging retaliatory discharge when the university terminated their employment after they both complained of a special arrangement between it and a county magistrate to automatically dispose of criminal charges involving student athletes by sentencing them to community service, and one for filing a complaint with the West Virginia Ethics Commission against a fellow officer for his personal use of campus police vehicle. The judge erred in finding the former officers failed to establish a prima facie case of retaliation since their complaints of wrongdoing, while not in close proximity to the time of their termination, were done in "good faith" and to the "appropriate authority" and could weigh in favor to a jury that the university's stated reasons for their termination were pretextual.
Court: West Virginia Supreme Court Of Appeals, Judge: Wooton, Filed On: April 11, 2024, Case #: 22-609, Categories: Education, employment, whistleblowers
J. Talwani denies an employer’s motion for summary judgment against its former employee’s retaliation claims. A reasonable jury could find the employee was fired under false pretenses, rather than placed on a performance improvement plan, as retaliation for making a False Claims Act complaint.
Court: USDC Massachusetts, Judge: Talwani, Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: 1:11cv10790, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: employment, False Claims, whistleblowers
J. Urbanksi grants the corporation a motion to dismiss. A cybersecurity expert hired by the corporation to head their apprentice program claims the corporation created a coverup to fire him for voicing ethical concerns regarding the apprentices. The expert told the corporation that he believed their practice of classifying the apprentices as contractors rather than employees is illegal. The expert fails to state a claim because Maryland has refused to recognize a cause of action for wrongful discharge where an employee is discharged after he complains internally of suspected wrongdoing without elevating his concerns to law enforcement.
Court: USDC Western District of Virginia, Judge: Urbanski, Filed On: April 2, 2024, Case #: 5:22cv7, Categories: employment, whistleblowers, employment Retaliation
J. Contreras denies the employee's motion for summary judgment in her suit alleging that she was demoted, reassigned and ultimately terminated in retaliation for her criticisms of her employer's response to the Covid-19 pandemic in early 2020, and partially grant's the employer's summary judgment motion. The employee argues that seven protected disclosures she made led to retaliation, but has only established a prima facie case of retaliation in relation to one of these seven. The employee's First Amendment retaliation claim survives summary judgment, since the employers' relevant, legitimate interests in protecting the release of inmates' and staff's health information are minimal relative to the employee's interest in "shedding light on the deplorable conditions in the D.C. Jail and the ongoing threat to inmate and staff safety." Finally, the employee's motion to file a substantial portion of her filings under seal is granted as to 16 exhibits, but denied as to others, including some which included information designated as confidential by the employer "out of an abundance of caution."
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Contreras, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 1:20cv2944, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: employment, whistleblowers, employment Retaliation
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court properly found for the employer in an employment discrimination suit. The employer is based in New York, and the employee only began working out of his New Jersey home in 2020 during the Covid-19 lockdown. He therefore cannot avail himself of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination or the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 01770, Categories: Jurisdiction, employment Discrimination, whistleblowers
J. Oetken partially denies the employer's motion to dismiss a trader's claims he was fired after repeatedly reporting illegal trading using the bank's proprietary account information of pending client orders to make unrelated stock trades. The trader failed to exhaust his administrative remedies for his promotion, suspension, and bonus claims. However, he may pursue his whistleblower and employment retaliation claims, as the trader plausibly alleges his protected activity was a contributing factor to his termination.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Oetken, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv8621, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: whistleblowers, employment Retaliation
J. Sotomayor finds that the circuit improperly ruled in whistleblower claims brought after an employee was allegedly terminated for reporting securities violations because statute did not require the employee to demonstrate the "employer acted with retaliatory intent," only that he had been terminated for reporting what he believed to be misconduct. Reversed.
Court: US Supreme Court, Judge: Sotomayor, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 22-660, Categories: employment, Securities, whistleblowers
Per curiam, the Ninth Circuit finds that the district court properly dismissed a whistleblower-retaliation action brought by a Canadian citizen who alleged the claim under the Sarbanes-Oxley and Dodd-Frank Acts. The whistleblower anti-retaliation provisions in the Sarbanes-Oxley and Dodd-Frank Acts do not apply outside the United States. Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: February 6, 2024, Case #: 22-15959, Categories: whistleblowers, employment Retaliation
[Consolidated.] J. Goodwine finds that plaintiff, a family services office supervisor, was improperly awarded $2 million in whistleblower claims brought after he filed reports contending cases had been seriously mismanaged and that his supervisor lied about her case management notes. Plaintiff did not suffer physical or economic harm, and thus he had been awarded excessive punitive damages. Reversed in part.
Court: Kentucky Court Of Appeals, Judge: Goodwine, Filed On: January 26, 2024, Case #: 2022-CA-0935-MR, Categories: Damages, employment Discrimination, whistleblowers
J. Bloomekatz finds the temporal proximity between the minority owner's reporting of alleged tax fraud to the IRS and his termination by the board of directors was sufficient to establish a prima facie case for retaliation, and although the lower court erroneously ruled otherwise, there was clear and convincing evidence to support the termination, which renders any error harmless. The minority owner's emergency conservatorship was fraudulent and based on his desire to oust his family members from the business, and their knowledge of his actions motivated the decision to fire him, regardless of the timing of his IRS report. Affirmed.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Bloomekatz, Filed On: January 22, 2024, Case #: 23-5374, Categories: whistleblowers, employment Retaliation
J. Long affirms a lower court ruling in favor of a pest control company, barring its former employee from performing any pest control services for its prior or current customers for two years. The employee failed to show his former employer improperly modified the terms of his employment contract, which included a non-compete agreement. Furthermore, the record supports the trial court’s finding the pest control company’s loss of customer goodwill outweighs its ex-employee's preference for performing services for its clients. Affirmed.
Court: Rhode Island Supreme Court, Judge: Long, Filed On: January 8, 2024, Case #: 22-356, Categories: employment, Evidence, whistleblowers
J. Leeson grants in part a company’s motion to dismiss an employee’s complaint that he was fired in retaliation for reporting that the company allowed its officers to access customers’ protected health information while outside of the United States, fraudulently classified its employees as Allentown residents to qualify for a tax credit, and laid off employees in violation of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act. The employee failed to state a claim under the False Claims Act.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge: Leeson, Filed On: November 27, 2023, Case #: 5:23cv2166, NOS: False Claims Act - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: False Claims, whistleblowers, employment Retaliation
J. Melgren grants a biopharmaceutical company's motion for summary concerning wrongful termination and whistleblower claims brought by a former employee. The company sufficiently showed in court that the former employee was let go for odd behavior, which included threatening to quit her job, sending inappropriate emails to colleagues, and dodging staff meetings.
Court: USDC Kansas, Judge: Melgren, Filed On: November 22, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv2238, NOS: Other Labor Litigation - Labor, Categories: employment, Damages, whistleblowers