News & Analysis as of

Employment Discrimination › Adverse Employment Action › Appeals

Poyner Spruill LLP

Why Comparator Analysis Matters: A Key Fourth Circuit Ruling

Poyner Spruill LLP on

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 generally prohibits covered employers from taking adverse actions against employees on the basis of race, sex, and other protected categories. Employee discipline is often the subject...more

Warner Norcross + Judd

Supreme Court Rejects Heightened Evidentiary Standard for Majority-Group Plaintiffs in Title VII Discrimination Claims

Warner Norcross + Judd on

On June 5, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services that courts cannot apply a heightened evidentiary standard to majority-group plaintiffs when deciding discrimination claims. The...more

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC

SCOTUS Rejects Heightened Standard for Title VII Majority Group

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC on

In Ames v. Ohio Dep’t of Youth Servs., No. 23-1039, 2025 WL 1583264, (U.S. June 5, 2025), the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that majority group plaintiffs (in this instance, a heterosexual plaintiff) do not need to meet...more

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC

How Courts are Applying the “Some Harm” Standard Since Muldrow

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC on

More than a year has passed since the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in its April 2024 decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, 601 U.S. 346, 144 S. Ct. 967, 218 L. Ed. 2d 322 (2024) that employees need only...more

Franczek P.C.

Supreme Court Rules Anti-Discrimination Protections Apply Equally to All

Franczek P.C. on

On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court held that a plaintiff who is a member of a majority group does not need to meet a more stringent burden of proof in order to prove unlawful employment discrimination under Title VII of the...more

McAfee & Taft

Can a non-disabled employee recover backpay under the ADA? At least one appeals court thinks so.

McAfee & Taft on

In the brilliant 1993 movie The Fugitive, there is an iconic scene in which the wrongly accused Dr. Richard Kimble emphatically tells Deputy U.S. Marshal Samuel Gerard, “I didn’t kill my wife!” Gerard responds, “I don’t...more

Venable LLP

Seventh Circuit Ruling Permits Back Pay for ADA Discrimination for Non-Disabled Workers

Venable LLP on

Last month, in Nawara v. Cook County Municipality, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals said a violation of ADA protections from medical examinations or inquiries counts as discrimination on account of disability, regardless...more

Gray Reed

Appeals Court Opens Door to More Discrimination Claims

Gray Reed on

On August 18, 2023, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which holds jurisdiction over Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi, abandoned a decades-old interpretation that discrimination must be related to an “ultimate employment...more

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace

Fifth Circuit Expands Universe of Title VII Actionable Adverse Employment Actions

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace on

On August 18, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit expanded the types of employment actions that may constitute “adverse employment action” under Title VII in Hamilton v. Dallas Cnty., 5th Cir. en banc. No....more

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

Fifth Circuit Upends ‘Ultimate Employment Decision’ Requirement for Title VII Discrimination Claims

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

On August 18, 2023, in Hamilton v. Dallas County, the full Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upended a longstanding precedent, significantly broadening the types of adverse employment actions that could give rise to an...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Fifth Circuit Upends 30 Years of Title VII Precedent, Making it Easier for Employees to Bring Discrimination Claims

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

Last week, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upended longstanding, employer-friendly precedent in cases brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. For decades, an employment discrimination plaintiff in the Fifth...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Alleged Attempt to Change Business' Demographics Deemed Direct Evidence of Discrimination

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on

​​​​​​​Under the “stray remarks” doctrine, courts can conclude that an employer’s expressions of frustration, or comments by a manager not involved in an adverse employment decision, are not persuasive evidence of...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Analyzes State's Domestic Violence and Abuse Leave Act

Holland & Knight LLP on

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) on Aug. 25, 2021, issued an opinion interpreting the Massachusetts Domestic Violence and Abuse Leave Act (DVLA) for the first time since its enactment in 2014. The SJC applied a...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

California Appeals Court Opines on Interplay Between Employment Discrimination Claims and Anti-SLAPP Laws

Robins Kaplan LLP on

A California appellate court last week issued a decision in Wilson v. CNN, applying and interpreting the scope of last year’s Supreme Court ruling in the same case, which had itself resolved a circuit split in the state as to...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Placing Employee on Performance Improvement Plan Does Not Count as Adverse Action

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on

In order to state a claim of employment discrimination under federal civil rights laws, employees must demonstrate that they have been subjected to an adverse action. In most cases, the employee has been fired, demoted, or...more

Butler Snow LLP

Chicken Fingers and Cat's Paws: 6th Circuit Reinstates Fired Employee's USERRA Claims

Butler Snow LLP on

Under the federal Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), employers are prohibited from taking adverse employment actions against employees because they are servicemembers or are obligated to...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

7th Circuit Rules that Extreme Obesity is Not an ADA Impairment (at Least on These Facts)

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

The U.S. Court of Appeals in the Seventh Circuit has recently decided a case involving an extremely obese bus driver and denied his claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101–12213, as...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Opposing Employer Actions Directed at General Public Not Protected Activity

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: An employee who expresses opposition to an employer’s policies and practices that affect members of the general public is not engaging in an activity that FEHA protects, because the activity is not opposing...more

Mintz - Employment, Labor & Benefits...

Third Circuit Joins Sister Courts in Finding Suspension with Pay is not an “Adverse Employment Action” Within Meaning of...

Mintz - Employment, Labor & Benefits... on

In Precia Jones v. SEPTA, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals last week joined six sister courts in finding that a suspension with pay typically does not constitute an “adverse employment action” within the meaning of Title...more

19 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide