News & Analysis as of

Employment Discrimination › Termination › Supreme Court of the United States

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

Mandatory referral to EAP may be "adverse action," court says

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP on

"Some harm" is all it takes. A federal appeals court found this week that requiring an employee to enter an Employee Assistance Program may be an “adverse employment action” under the federal anti-discrimination laws....more

Benesch

Starbucks Union Dispute Reaches Supreme Court

Benesch on

On Friday, January 12, the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal from Starbucks on a case involving the termination of seven Memphis, Tennessee employees....more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

What Does Affirmative Action’s Death Knell Mean for Employers?

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

At the end of June, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows Of Harvard College, Nos. 20-1199 & 21-707, 2023 WL 4239254 (U.S. June 29, 2023), outlawed race-based...more

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

The Cat Fights Back: 7th Circuit Discusses Cat's Paw Theory Post-Staub

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP on

In 2011, the United States Supreme Court made the"cat's paw" theory of liability significantly easier for employees to prove. An employee can establish a cat's paw theory of liability in an employment discrimination suit when...more

4 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