64 results for 'cat:"Employment" AND cat:"Due Process"'.
J. Childs upholds the district court's dismissal of a former FBI agent’s due process claims arising from his termination, which occurred following an investigation into his mishandling of allegations of molestation against USA Gymnastics doctor Lawrence Gerard Nassar. The agent fails to adequately plead a deprivation of a liberty or property interest without due process, and also does not show he suffered defamation in connection with his termination. Affirmed.
Court: DC Circuit, Judge: Childs, Filed On: December 12, 2023, Case #: 22-5264 , Categories: employment, Defamation, due Process
J. Cadish finds the district court properly denied the correctional officer's petition for judicial review of an administrative decision. The officer was suspended for 5 days for insubordination and says the department received a time extension without good cause while conducting its investigation. Though the extension was given strictly for the department to decide the length of the suspension, and done after the investigation had been completed, the proposed discipline is part of the process of review and subject to the same rules and needs. Affirmed.
Court: Nevada Supreme Court, Judge: Cadish , Filed On: December 12, 2023, Case #: 85257, Categories: Administrative Law, employment, due Process
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. Bunning rules in part for school defendants in employment discrimination claims because the employee failed to demonstrate her due process rights were violated regarding the disciplinary hearing, and claims brought against the superintendent in his individual capacity must be dismissed because any action had been taken against the employee in the superintendent's official capacity. However, sex-based discrimination claims may continue because the employee demonstrated she may have been disciplined more harshly for being a woman.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Kentucky, Judge: Bunning, Filed On: December 4, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv93, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment, due Process, employment Discrimination
J. Klausner dismisses the California State University professors' complaint accusing the CSU chancellor and others of implementing a policy that discriminated against members of the Indian and South Asian communities and those who practiced Hinduism. The professors claim that the policy violates due process because it uses the word "caste" without providing a definition and thus allows vague usage. However, the anti-discrimination policy is meant to shield religion from discrimination, and they do not show that they face a credible threat of persecution from this policy despite being Hindu practitioners for the duration of their employment.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Klausner, Filed On: November 21, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv7550, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, employment, due Process
J. Silva grants the city’s motion to amend the pretrial order in this employment discrimination suit to identify witnesses presented as those most knowledgeable. The employee has been on notice that a “person most knowledgeable” would be called by the city, and the proposed testimony will not be unexpected. The employee has also named one of the witnesses on the city’s witness list, which further demonstrates a lack of prejudice. There is no evidence that the city seeks to amend in bad faith.
Court: USDC Nevada, Judge: Silva, Filed On: November 3, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv198, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: due Process, Discovery, employment Discrimination
J. Barrett finds the Arkansas Board of Review improperly affirmed the Division of Workforce Services’ decision that the claimant repay the entirety of her unemployment benefits, allegedly having left work without good cause. The claimant received both state and federal benefits, and the board did not conduct two different waiver analyses. The appeals court affirms the decision requiring the claimant to repay $2,209 in state benefits, and remands for further findings regarding repayment of the $13,521 in federal benefits. Affirmed in part. Remanded in part.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Barrett, Filed On: November 1, 2023, Case #: E-22-406, Categories: employment, due Process
J. Thyer finds the Arkansas Board of Review improperly entered an order requiring the hotel employee to repay $2,472 in overpaid benefits. During the Covid-19 pandemic, she began receiving $168 in weekly state unemployment, later receiving $600 in weekly Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation. Her employment then ended due to lack of business and she was given $2,010 in severance pay, which was properly found to disqualify her from benefits. The board did fail to make findings as to whether repayment would be contrary to equity and good conscience. Affirmed in part. Reversed in part and remanded.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Thyer, Filed On: October 18, 2023, Case #: E-22-366, Categories: employment, due Process, Covid-19
J. Palafox finds a lower court erred in granting no-answer default judgment to a man who had sued his former employer, a car dealership, for alleged employment discrimination and other claims. While a process server for the man was unable to serve the car dealership’s registered agent, he instead served another person, but it is not clear the server exercised “reasonable diligence to effect personal service,” nor did he provide adequate information connecting the served defendant to the car dealership. Reversed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Palafox, Filed On: October 16, 2023, Case #: 08-22-00187-CV, Categories: Civil Procedure, due Process, employment Discrimination
J. Kobayashi dismisses a complaint stemming from the denial of an individual’s unemployment assistance, finding that the civil rights claims against the state, the governor and other state officials in their official capacity are barred by the 11th Amendment. Due process claims in their individual capacity also fail as the complaint is not clear on basic facts, such as whether the employee qualifies for unemployment benefits in the first place or what the denial process looked like.
Court: USDC Hawaii, Judge: Kobayashi, Filed On: October 13, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv385, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: employment, Government, due Process
Per curiam, the Fifth Circuit finds district court improperly granted summary judgment in favor of Union Pacific in this Federal Employers Liability Act suit brought by the employee after being diagnosed with asbestosis. Though the court found the lawsuit was untimely under Act’s three-year statute of limitations, tolled by agreement of the parties for one year, questions of fact remain regarding when tolling terminated. Vacated and remanded.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: October 4, 2023, Case #: 22-40791, Categories: employment, due Process, Premises Liability
J. Wilson finds that the district court properly rejected conspiracy and breach of contract claims brought by the superintendent in a wrongful termination and civil rights action against the city board of education and board members. The superintendent failed to sufficiently allege a conspiracy and failed to plead an exception to sovereign immunity with respect to the contract claims. However, the district court improperly dismissed the superintendent's due process claim. The district court incorrectly interpreted ambiguities in the minutes of the meeting where board members voted to terminate the superintendent's contract and failed to draw reasonable inferences in her favor. Reversed in part.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Wilson, Filed On: October 4, 2023, Case #: 22-10858, Categories: employment, due Process, Contract
J. Wormuth denies, in part, a village's motion to dismiss an employee's Monell liability claim related to the reduction in his job duties and pay. The worker has sufficiently alleged the village's allowance of the mayor to act as the final policymaker is an unconstitutional policy.
Court: USDC New Mexico, Judge: Wormuth, Filed On: September 30, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv52, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment, Immunity, due Process
J. Bolden grants the employer's motion for summary judgment, ruling that because the bus driver was provided access to all of the evidence against him and was granted a hearing before his termination, his due process claim fails as a matter of law. Meanwhile, the driver's failure to include disciplinary records of white drivers who were allegedly treated more favorably requires dismissal of his Equal Protection claim because he failed to prove the white drivers were similarly situated.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Bolden, Filed On: September 29, 2023, Case #: 3:21cv357, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: due Process, Equal Protection, employment Discrimination
J. Khalsa denies, in part, the city's motion to dismiss, ruling the just-cause termination and definite-tenure provisions of the city administrator's employment contract override any at-will employment provisions and grant her a protected property interest in her job; therefore, the lack of hearings or any explanation for her termination create a plausible due process claim.
Court: USDC New Mexico, Judge: Khalsa, Filed On: September 21, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv802, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment, due Process, Contract
J. Adams grants an individual to file an amended complaint regarding allegations of discrimination against the city’s employees allegedly asking him to leave from the library. The individual must comply with the Federal Rule of Civil Procedures when laying the complaint out, if he no longer wishes to file the amendment, he must file notice informing the court.
Court: USDC Middle District of Alabama, Judge: Adams, Filed On: September 8, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv196, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Procedure, due Process, employment Discrimination
J. Adams grants an individual to file an amended complaint regarding allegations of a hostile shopping environment, defamation and discrimination against a convenience store’s employee. The individual must comply with the Federal Rule of Civil Procedures when laying the complaint out; if he no longer wishes to file the amendment, he must file notice informing the court.
Court: USDC Middle District of Alabama, Judge: Adams, Filed On: September 8, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv192, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Defamation, due Process, employment Discrimination
J. Marbley grants the city's motion for summary judgment, ruling the police officers assigned to administrative duty after they made critical comments about their superiors cannot bring First Amendment claims. The complaints about mistreatment involve personnel matters and, therefore, do not constitute protected speech. Meanwhile, the officers' due process claims fail as a matter of law because there is no property interest in the opportunity to work overtime, especially given the department's policy of restricting shifts for officers who are under investigation for misconduct like the ones at issue in this case.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Marbley, Filed On: August 28, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv940, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: employment, due Process, First Amendment
J. Garaufis dismisses a former NYPD officer’s sole denial-of-access claim alleging the department withheld exculpatory evidence and fabricated claims during a disciplinary hearing regarding an incident in which his ex-girlfriend suffered a gunshot wound to her neck during a domestic dispute, which ultimately led to his termination from the force. His allegations are mostly conclusory, failing to allege which official actions on the defendants’ part prevented him from pursuing any claims.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Garaufis, Filed On: August 7, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv1217, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: employment, due Process, Police Misconduct
J. Rovner finds that the lower court properly found for the government employer on due process claims stemming from an employee's termination. The employee was given both notice and the opportunity to respond to the charges against her before the decision was made to fire her. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Rovner, Filed On: August 2, 2023, Case #: 22-1848, Categories: employment, due Process
J. Cabell grants employers’ motion to dismiss former employees’ actions against them, for firing employees who refused to be vaccinated against Covid-19 on religious grounds, for failure to state viable claims. One of the claims was that the employers were committing assault, which is not viable because they did not attempt to cause or actually cause physical harm to their employees by having a vaccine mandate. The former employees’ claims regarding the 14th Amendment are not persuasive. They also fail to adequately show that the state took action against them, so their arguments regarding their due process rights are also unpersuasive.
Court: USDC Massachusetts, Judge: Cabell, Filed On: August 1, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv11952, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: employment, due Process, First Amendment
J. Jones finds that the trial court improperly ruled in favor of the employee in his lawsuit challenging a decision made by the district to reassign him to a different position. The school district gave the employee ample notice of his reassignment and offered him due process in addressing his grievances. Furthermore, the education commissioner properly upheld the school district's decision. Reversed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Jones, Filed On: July 12, 2023, Case #: 03-22-00083-CV, Categories: employment, Government, due Process