19 results for 'cat:"Employment" AND cat:"Military"'.
J. Taranto finds that the court of federal claims properly ruled in claims brought by involuntarily retired members of the Coast Guard because their involuntary retirements were not part of a reduction in force and thus were unlawful. Affirmed.
Court: Federal Circuit, Judge: Taranto, Filed On: March 1, 2024, Case #: 3/1/24, Categories: employment, military
J. Dorsey denies the Air Force realty specialist's motion for summary judgment on his employment discrimination claims. Subject to a 2-year probationary period during which he consistently received sub-par performance evaluations as well as reprimands for unprofessional conduct, the specialist was placed on probation. He then filed an informal racial discrimination complaint and was later fired. The Air Force has shown legitimate, nonretaliatory reasons for the termination. Nothing in the record shows that the Air Force used a personnel duties document for evaluating other realty specialists in the same program, or otherwise deviated from standard practice.
Court: USDC Nevada, Judge: Dorsey, Filed On: January 30, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv2281, NOS: Civil Rights - Habeas Corpus, Categories: Evidence, employment Discrimination, military
J. Robertson grants summary judgment to the U.S. Department of the Army in this employment discrimination lawsuit, alleging age and gender discrimination. The employee fails to show that her non-selection for a promotion was based on a retaliatory motive. Also, the government has shown that an interview panel recommended another candidate for the vacancy "based on the quality of his interview performance."
Court: USDC Eastern District of Oklahoma, Judge: Robertson, Filed On: January 29, 2024, Case #: 6:19cv437, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, military, 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. Baker finds that the district court improperly issued an order remanding to state court an action against private contractors providing war-zone security services to the Department of Defense. The action was brought by employees who guarded bases, equipment and personnel in Iraq. The guards claim that their working conditions violated the contractors’ recruiting representations and contracts. The contractors sufficiently alleged a federal defense of compliance with the federal regulations incorporated into a Theater Wide Internal Security Services II contract between the contractors and the Department of Defense. Reversed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Baker, Filed On: October 25, 2023, Case #: 21-15261, Categories: employment, military, Class Action
J. Clement finds the district court improperly granted summary judgment to the Army as to the septuagenarian civilian doctor’s retaliation claims after he resigned during an investigation into his removal and replacement by a younger doctor as chief of surgery. The doctor has established a case for retaliation by alleging he was removed, had clinical privileges placed in abeyance, was reassigned to report to a younger supervisor and had his career threatened if he refused to resign. He has raised a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he was subject to constructive discharge. The Army has demonstrated a legitimate, nondiscriminatory and non-pretextual reason for removing the doctor, and summary judgment is proper as the discrimination claims. Affirmed in part. Reversed in part and remanded.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Clement, Filed On: October 24, 2023, Case #: 22-30756, Categories: employment Discrimination, military, employment Retaliation
J. Chutkan denies, in part, the Secretary of the Department of the Navy's motion to dismiss an employee's employment discrimination action. The employee has sufficiently pleaded allegations to support her claim for hostile work environment based on her race and sex.
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Chutkan, Filed On: September 25, 2023, Case #: 1:20cv3015, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, military, employment Retaliation
J. Contreras grants, in part, an individual's motion to compel in her pro se employment discrimination case arising from her termination with the Marine Corps. The employer must provide information on certain possible comparators, as she has provided sufficient information on nine individuals "to clear the low bar of relevance."
Court: USDC District of Columbia, Judge: Contreras, Filed On: September 14, 2023, Case #: 1:21cv1567, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Discovery, employment Discrimination, military
[Consolidated.] J. Beatty rules a former employee may pursue ADA claims against an electric company, but not an energy supplier. The former employee, a foreman, sufficiently showed in court that the electric company failed to accommodate his post- traumatic stress disorder, which is the result of experiences he suffered while serving in the military.
Court: USDC Southern District of Illinois, Judge: Beatty, Filed On: August 31, 2023, Case #: 3:19cv1182, NOS: Amer w/Disabilities-Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, employment, military
J. Kelly finds a lower court properly dismissed a former Navy service member's discrimination claims against his employer under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act. The former Navy serviceman argued that his employer was obligated to provide him with tuition assistance to obtain a bachelor's degree. However, his employer provided sufficient evidence in court that the G.I. Bill covered his tuition in full. Affirmed.
Court: 8th Circuit, Judge: Kelly, Filed On: July 28, 2023, Case #: 22-2321, Categories: Education, employment Discrimination, military
J. Wynn finds the lower court properly dismissed the Air Force veteran's appeal of the Physical Disability Board of Review decision denying him benefits. The soldier dealing with anxiety after witnessing a rocket attack is not entitled to a physical examination from the Board as the Board was created to retroactively review disability determinations based on the records of the armed force concerned rather than on a physical exam. Affirmed.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: Wynn, Filed On: July 26, 2023, Case #: 22-1591, Categories: employment, Government, military
J. Douglas finds the district court properly found in favor of the school district in this suit brought by the former middle school assistant principal and Army Reservist who was disciplined because of parental complaints. The school board voted not to renew his contract after an investigation into his improper behavior regarding student discipline for illegal drugs. He says he was fired for taking military leave, and, at trial, the jury found the reservist’s responsibilities played a role in the board’s decision. Judgment was entered in favor of the board being that the text of the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act provides employers with a mixed-motive defense. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Douglas, Filed On: July 17, 2023, Case #: 22-20363, Categories: Education, military, employment Retaliation
J. Rice partially grants class certification for the package driver's claim that UPS did not comply with the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act when it did not compensate his short-term leaves, which he took as part of his obligations to the Army Reserve. The driver sufficiently identifies common questions of law and fact involving himself and other package drivers, such as how non-military leave is not comparable to military leave under USERRA for those who require it.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Washington, Judge: Rice, Filed On: July 5, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv114, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, military, Class Action