1,133 results for 'cat:"Employment Retaliation"'.
J. Atchley dismisses this employment discrimination lawsuit following a bench trial. The employee sought prospective injunctive relief against certain individual defendants, alleging discrimination and retaliation under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, in connection with her reassignment to "a position she felt was less desirable." However, she failed to introduce evidence of her age or show a "proper comparator."
Court: USDC Eastern District of Tennessee , Judge: Atchley, Filed On: May 13, 2024, Case #: 3:21cv270, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: 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. DeGiusti denies the former employee's motion for partial summary judgment in this lawsuit stemming from the termination of her employment. Specifically, the former employee contends that she is entitled to judgment on her retaliation claim under the Fair Labor Standards Act. However, she presents "evidence of two distinct retaliatory motivations for her termination," and her motion also fails to address "the issue of each defendant's liability."
Court: USDC Western District of Oklahoma , Judge: DeGiusti, Filed On: May 13, 2024, Case #: 5:22cv917, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Harjani partially grants Veterans Affairs’ motion for summary judgment on one of its former social worker’s claims that the VA didn’t honor her multiple disability accommodations. The court tosses several of the former social worker’s failure to accommodate, age and sex discrimination, retaliation and hostile work environment claims, but finds factual disputes preclude judgment on other, similar allegations.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Harjani, Filed On: May 13, 2024, Case #: 1:20cv2710, NOS: Housing/Accommodations - Civil Rights, Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, Employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Brailsford grants a city and mayor's motion for summary judgment regarding a former city public works director's First Amendment retaliation claim and state-law claim for violation of the Idaho Protection of Public Employees Act. The former director claims that the mayor asked him to resign after he backed a different candidate for mayor, then tried to get the city council to remove him from his position, excluded him from work, and removed some of his work responsibilities, leading the director to resign. The director has not presented sufficient evidence of retaliation. His communications advocating for a city administrator position, which would alter the mayor's job responsibilities, were not protected speech because they were spoken in his capacity as a public employee. The director does not assert that his work conditions were intolerable and has not provided evidence that he felt compelled to resign.
Court: USDC Idaho, Judge: Brailsford, Filed On: May 10, 2024, Case #: 4:22cv366, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, employment Retaliation
J. Trauger grants the defendant company's summary judgment motion in this lawsuit brought by a former employee under Title VII and Section 1981, alleging discrimination and retaliation. As to retaliation, the court does not find that the employee engaged in protected activity. As to discrimination, she does not show that the company's "proffered reason for the termination decision was pretextual."
Court: USDC Middle District of Tennessee , Judge: Trauger, Filed On: May 10, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv299, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Block grants judgement to the New York City Transit Authority on a former bus maintainer’s employment retaliation complaint. He claims it refused to rehire him after a jury returned a verdict in his favor on claims that he was fired after reporting a document adorned with Nazi symbols at a workplace copier machine. The court finds the decision not to rehire him was not retaliatory, as the maintainer fails to present any evidence that suggests those involved in the decision knew of his lawsuit.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Block, Filed On: May 10, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv4255, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Retaliation
J. Coleman finds the court of appeals erroneously determined the employee could not bring wrongful termination claims after she was fired for reporting patient abuse at the long-term care facility. While the public policy exception in Mississippi law gives an exception for unlawful "acts of an employer," the language also necessarily covers the acts of a co-worker, like the one who abused the patient in this case; therefore, the jury verdict in favor of the employee will be reinstated. Reversed.
Court: Mississippi Supreme Court, Judge: Coleman, Filed On: May 9, 2024, Case #: 2022-CT-188, Categories: Health Care, employment Retaliation
J. Neeley finds the county court properly granted the dept's. plea to the jurisdiction. The female African American former employee filed suit after being denied employment for a position from which she had resigned. She was eventually rehired and filed civil rights charges with the Texas Workforce Commission, alleging she was retaliated against, and that the dept. did not comply with a settlement agreement. The court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because the negligence claim does not fall within the tort claims act's limited waiver of immunity, the state is immune from the claim for breach of the settlement agreement, no prima facie claim for retaliation was stated, and the state is not the employer pursuant to the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Neeley , Filed On: May 8, 2024, Case #: 12-23-00204-CV, Categories: Jurisdiction, Employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Neeley finds the county court properly granted the Department of Health and Human Services' plea to the jurisdiction. The black, female former employee filed suit after being denied employment for a position from which she had resigned. She was eventually rehired and filed civil rights charges with the Texas Workforce Commission, alleging she was retaliated against, and that the department did not comply with a settlement agreement. The court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because the negligence claim does not fall within the Texas Tort Claims Act's limited waiver of immunity, the state is immune from the claim for breach of the settlement agreement, no prima facie claim for retaliation was stated and the state is not the employer pursuant to the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Neeley , Filed On: May 8, 2024, Case #: 12-23-00204-CV, Categories: Jurisdiction, Employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Leinenweber denies the defendant behavioral therapy provider’s motion to dismiss ADA discrimination claims brought by an autistic former employee. The court finds the former employee has sufficiently alleged that she was demoted, and then pushed to quit, by the company’s unwillingness to accommodate her needs as a person with autism.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Leinenweber, Filed On: May 8, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv3707, NOS: Amer w/Disabilities - Other - Civil Rights, Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, Employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Bennett grants the police department’s motion to dismiss this employment dispute brought by a former Black police officer alleging race discrimination, hostile work environment, retaliation, Monell, and violations of civil rights and the Maryland Fair Employment Practice Act. The police department alleges the employee failed to exhaust her administrative remedies and her complaint is time-barred after an investigation was opened on her for a fight while off-duty. The court finds her EEOC charge was filed in timely manner, her Title VII claims appear to be time-barred. Her complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, but she has 15 days to file an amended complaint.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Bennett, Filed On: May 8, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv2215, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Kness partially grants the Illinois Department of Corrections’ motion for summary judgment on an older Black employee’s claims of age and race discrimination, and retaliation for union association. The employee, who oversees several parole officers, claims his spotty disciplinary record with the department is the result of systemic ageism and anti-Black racism and departmental retaliation for his efforts to unionize his office. The court finds most of the employee’s discrimination claims either untimely or lacking sufficient evidence, but also finds there is sufficient evidence to support his claim for union activity retaliation against several specific department personnel.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Kness, Filed On: May 8, 2024, Case #: 1:18cv282, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation, Labor / Unions
J. Quereshi denies, in part, the United States Department of Treasury and a supervisor in this employment dispute brought by a former employee claiming national origin discrimination, retaliation, hostile work environment and constructive discharge. She alleges numerous times she was assigned more work than other coworkers, ignored, criticized, insulted by her supervisors and not selected for promotions before her forced retirement. The employee is granted leave to file an amended complaint with the appropriate details of her discrimination, hostile work environment and constructive discharge claims.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Quereshi, Filed On: May 8, 2024, Case #: 8:23cv1699, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Rabner finds that the appellate division improperly held that a police officer violated the non-disparagement clause in her settlement with the township by stating in a television news interview that she had been abused for eight years and discussing allegedly retaliatory disciplinary charges because the non-disparagement clause would bar speech protected under state anti-discrimination laws, and thus was not enforceable. Further, "survivors of discrimination and harassment have the right to speak about their experiences in any number of ways, and they can no longer be restrained by confidentiality provisions in employment contracts or settlement agreements." Reversed in part.
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court, Judge: Rabner , Filed On: May 7, 2024, Case #: A-2-23, Categories: Employment, Defamation, employment Retaliation
J. Moon grants the city's motion for summary judgment in an employment discrimination suit. A female firefighter sued the city, claiming she experienced discriminatory treatment from her superiors and that her superiors opened a retaliatory investigation into her conduct, resulting in her demotion. There is no evidence of her employers treating male coworkers differently; they, too, are required to provide a doctor's note if taking sick leave, and there is no evidence of them making statements about women not belonging in the fire service. A feeling of disrespect is not a substitute for evidence of discriminatory treatment.
Court: USDC Western District of Virginia, Judge: Moon, Filed On: May 7, 2024, Case #: 6:23cv32, Categories: Employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Sessions denies a construction and excavation business, and its board members motion to dismiss in this Fair Labor Standards Act dispute brought by the Department of Labor alleging unlawful retaliation against employees that received back wages from a settlement. The employees alleges that the board members made false and retaliatory statements on the social media platform Facebook. The DoL plausibly alleged the conduct was a retaliation threat based on coercion making it plausibly unprotected. Discovery may proceed and the Labor Department’s motion to amend is also denied.
Court: USDC Vermont, Judge: Sessions, Filed On: May 7, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv560, NOS: Fair Labor Standards Act - Labor, Categories: employment Retaliation, Labor
J. Newman grants the police department's motion for summary judgment, ruling the police officer's age discrimination claim fails. The younger officer used as a comparator did not commit the same type of misconduct and, therefore, is not similarly situated, while a supervisor's single comment about "younger officers" during disciplinary proceedings does not constitute direct evidence of discrimination. Meanwhile, the retaliation claim also fails as a matter of law because the fitness for duty evaluation required before the officer could return to work was not an "adverse employment action," especially considering the officer blamed several mistakes that led to his suspension on the stress of his job.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Newman, Filed On: May 7, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv96, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Richardson grants the defendant company’s motion for summary judgment in this case brought by a former employee asserting certain state-law employment related claims, including retaliatory discharge under the Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Law and discriminatory discharge under the Tennessee Disability Act. As to the former employee’s two claims, which both stem from his termination, the court concludes that there are no issues of fact and that the employer is “entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
Court: USDC Middle District of Tennessee , Judge: Richardson, Filed On: May 7, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv87, NOS: Other Labor Litigation - Labor, Categories: Employment, Employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Chun declines to dismiss the school faculty member's retaliation claim in his complaint alleging that the university president wrongfully fired the faculty member for putting a statement in his class syllabus, emails and outside his faculty office door about the Coast Salish tribe's claim to land that read, "I acknowledge that by the labor theory of property the Coast Salish people can claim historical ownership of almost none of the land currently occupied by the University of Washington." The school faculty member plausibly alleges a First Amendment retaliation claim as his speech “related to scholarship or teaching." While the university and its president cite the "Johnson v. Poway Unified School District" decision that allows discipline of speech on school grounds, that case's analysis focuses on secondary school education, not college education.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Chun, Filed On: May 3, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv964, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Education, employment Retaliation, First Amendment