News & Analysis as of

Appeals Discrimination Title VII

Cozen O'Connor

Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services

Cozen O'Connor on

In a unanimous opinion, the Supreme Court of the United States announced that Title VII’s protections against discrimination do not require majority group individuals (including white people, men, and heterosexuals) to...more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

BREAKING: SCOTUS overrules higher standard for majority group asserting bias claims

On June 5th the U.S. Supreme Court held that majority-group plaintiffs do not have to show special “background circumstances” to support a Title VII discrimination claim. ...more

Benesch

Supreme Court Appears Poised to Do Away With Additional Burdens on Reverse-Discrimination Plaintiffs

Benesch on

On February 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Ames v. OH Dept. of Youth Services, which questioned whether the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals correctly decided that a heterosexual plaintiff should have...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

Supreme Court Expresses Skepticism Over Higher Burden in Majority Discrimination Cases

The Supreme Court of the United States recently heard oral arguments in a case to determine whether employees who are part of a majority group must meet a higher standard to prove discrimination....more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Supreme Court to Hear Reverse Discrimination Appeal

A few months ago, we published an alert noting that the U.S. Supreme Court had agreed to hear Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services. The case addresses whether plaintiffs alleging reverse discrimination under Title VII...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Fourth Circuit Cautions Employers on Deciding Legitimacy of Workers' Religious Beliefs

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many employers established internal procedures to evaluate employees' requests for religious and medical-based exemptions from vaccination mandates. ...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Get with the Pronoun: Eleventh Circuit Rules Pervasive Misgendering Is Harassment

If an employer or coworker persistently uses a transgender worker’s wrong name or identified pronoun, can that constitute a hostile work environment in violation of Title VII? In Copeland v. Georgia Department of Corrections,...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Buyer Beware: Tenth Circuit Issues Decision Emphasizing Critical Need for Employment Diligence

A recent decision from the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals highlights some of the pitfalls of entering into commercial transactions without conducting thorough employment diligence – even in the asset purchase context....more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

2nd Circ. Title VII Ruling Guides On Joint Employer Doctrine

The joint employer rule has been a hot topic in the last several years, mostly in the context of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Recall the drama of the Trump administration's narrower definition of a joint employer for...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

U.S. Justice Department Argues Against EEOC Position Protecting Transgender People

Earlier this year, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission persuaded the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals that a funeral home’s termination of a transgender employee violated Title VII’s prohibition against sex...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Tenth Circuit Allows Discrimination Claim to Proceed Despite No EEOC Charge

Plaintiffs who want to file lawsuits alleging discrimination under federal civil rights laws such as Title VII must first file an administrative charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission before proceeding to...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

Second Circuit Upholds Sexual Orientation Discrimination Claim Under Title VII, Primes Debate for Supreme Court

On February 26, 2018, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals rendered an en banc decision in Zarda v. Altitude Express that significantly expands employees’ rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Ten judges...more

Fisher Phillips

Court Lowers Punitive Damages Bar In Claims Against NYC Employers

Fisher Phillips on

The state’s highest court might have just made life more difficult for employers facing liability under New York City’s anti-bias law. Clarifying a question left open by New York City’s Human Rights Law (NYCHRL), the New York...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

New York’s Highest Court Establishes Lowered Threshold for Punitive Damages Under New York City Law

In Chauca v. Abraham, No. 113 (November 20, 2017), the New York State Court of Appeals clarified the standard for awarding punitive damages under the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL). Unlike Title VII of the Civil...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

The Not-So-Elusive 12(b)(6) Dismissal: Fifth Circuit Shoots Down Retaliation Claim Based on Single Text Message

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed the dismissal of a Title VII retaliation claim under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to state a claim where the plaintiff premised her...more

Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, LLP

Client Alert: Eleventh Circuit Declines to Reconsider Sexual Orientation Discrimination Decision; Plaintiff Will Appeal to U.S....

In April, we reported that a three-judge panel of the Eleventh Circuit held that sexual orientation discrimination is not prohibited under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital, et....more

Rumberger | Kirk

Eleventh Circuit Rules that Title VII Does Not Prohibit Sexual Orientation Discrimination

Rumberger | Kirk on

On March 10, 2017, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held in Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital that Title VII does not prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Accordingly,...more

FordHarrison

Seventh Circuit Indicates It May Conclude that Sexual Orientation Discrimination is Sex Discrimination Under Title VII

FordHarrison on

Since its enactment, courts have followed the premise that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not prohibit sexual orientation discrimination. A changing of the tides began in July 2015, when the Equal Employment...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

SCOTUS Grimm decision could impact CFPB position on ECOA protection for gender identity and sexual orientation

Ballard Spahr LLP on

On October 28, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the petition for a writ of certiorari in Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board, a decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit that marked the first time...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Eleventh Circuit Declines EEOC’s Invitation To Expand Race To Include Personal Expression Or Cultural Characteristics

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: After a black woman’s employment offer was rescinded because she refused to cut off her dreadlocks in violation of a company grooming policy, the EEOC sued under Title VII for discrimination on the basis...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

School of Hard (Dread) Locks: EEOC Loses Appeal Over Hairstyle Ban

Last week the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of a case the EEOC filed over a job applicant’s short dreadlocks. In 2010, Chastity Jones, an African American, applied for a position with...more

Littler

State Appellate Court Considers Employer’s Duty to Conduct Criminal Background Checks

Littler on

In the last few years, there has been a significant spike in the number of lawsuits challenging employer use of criminal background checks, including class action lawsuits brought under the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act. ...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

Fourth Circuit Decides Rule Exempting Certain Management Professionals from Retaliation Lawsuits Not Applicable under Title VII

Employers in the Fourth Circuit states of Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia must now be mindful that employees who deal with complaints of discrimination and harassment can point to that...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Fourth Circuit Says Placing Employee on PIP Not Discrimination Under Title VII

Employers routinely use Performance Improvement Plans (PIPs) to notify employees of job performance issues. If an employee believes that they have unfairly been placed under a PIP, can this form the basis for an employment...more

Sands Anderson PC

Serving Two Masters- Fourth Circuit Recognizes the Joint Employment Doctrine

Sands Anderson PC on

Much to the delight of employees and their counsel, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has expanded the number of potentially liable defendants in Title VII employment discrimination actions. In the July 15, 2015 published...more

33 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide