More than a year after plaintiff’s employment was terminated, he brought an action against his employer for common law wrongful termination against public policy, contending he was treated unfairly and discriminated against because he suffered a work-related injury and was disabled. Defendant employer brought a motion for summary judgment, arguing plaintiff’s action is barred by the exclusivity doctrine under Workers’ Compensation statutes and the one-year statute of limitations under the Fair Employment and Housing Act
No Age Discrimination By Athletic Club.
An athletic club offers a range of membership levels, providing various privileges at one or more locations. The Young Professional program—at issue in this litigation—offers a reduced-cost membership for individuals ages 18 to 29, in recognition of the reduced financial resources of the under-30 age group. Launched in 2003, the program is offered at all but two of defendant’s facilities, and restricts access hours at two of defendant’s other facilities.
Question Of Fact In Age Discrimination Case.
Plaintiff is a border patrol agent within the Department of Homeland Security who at 54 was the oldest of the 24 persons who applied for one of four open positions within the agency. The four persons selected ranged from 44 to 48 years old. He sued for age discrimination, and the agency moved for summary […]
Pork.
A prison inmate is a Muslim and a member of the Nation of Islam, a religious organization. His religious beliefs forbid him from consuming or handling pork. Prison officials ordered the inmate to cook pork loins as part of his kitchen duties. The Ninth Circuit held prison employees violated the inmate’s clearly established right to […]
Disparate Impact, Not Disparate Treatment.
With regard to a dispute about a low-income housing development in Texas, the United States Supreme Court held disparate impact claims are cognizable, stating: “Much progress remains to be made in our Nation’s continuing struggle against racial isolation. In striving to achieve our historic commitment to creating an integrated society. . . .we must remain […]
All Female Staffing Policy For Some Prison Jobs Not Discrimination Against Males.
A prison designated a number of female-only positions, and the prison guard union brought suit for discrimination against male correctional officers. In a 1993 case [Jordan v. Gardner (1993) 986 F.2d 1521], a federal court halted the practice of permitting cross-gender pat down searches in nonemergency situations. In addition, over the years, there have been instances […]
Racially Profiling Hispanics Again!
The background involves allegations the Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio’s police force has a custom, policy and practice of racially profiling Latino drivers and passengers, and of stopping them pretextually under the auspices of enforcing federal and state immigration-related laws, resulting in longer and more burdensome detentions for Latinos than for non-Latinos in […]
Not Protected Activity Under Anti-SLAPP Statute.
A doctor brought an action against a hospital alleging both race and gender discrimination in several ways in different causes of action. The trial court granted the hospital’s anti-SLAPP motion, and the doctor appealed. The appellate court, while recognizing the hospital’s peer review process was involved in the doctor’s termination, reversed with regard to the […]
Reasonable Accommodation Does Not Require Elimination Of Essential Job Function.
Plaintiff injured his knee at work in 2003 and thereafter underwent several surgeries and procedures, and was placed on light duty. The employer, a public entity, had an accommodations committee which offered plaintiff either a lateral job move or a demotion to assume a lesser job, neither of which appealed to plaintiff. As negotiations continued, […]
State Prisoner Allowed To Have A Beard.
Arkansas’s state prison’s grooming policy prohibits the growth of facial hair for security reasons. A prisoner, who is fundamentalist Muslim, asserts the prison’s policy burdens his practice of religion. The United States Supreme Court held that the policy violates 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc [the Religious Land Use and Institutional Persons Act of 2000] which prohibits […]
- 1
- 2
- 3
- …
- 6
- Next Page »