News & Analysis as of

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) › Appellate Courts

Whiteford

Employment Law Update: Fourth Circuit Decision Highlights the Impact of Supreme Court’s Change to Adverse Employment Action...

Whiteford on

In 2024, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, which arose out of a sex discrimination claim filed by a female police officer. Officer Muldrow was transferred to a different position within...more

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP

Sixth Circuit Requires Employer Intent for Customer Sexual Harassment Under Title VII

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP on

The Sixth Circuit in Bivens v. Zep, Inc. brushed aside the EEOC’s and several circuit court positions with respect to the standard to be used when determining an employer’s liability under Title VII for sexual harassment of...more

Epstein Becker & Green

NLRB Authority in Jeopardy, Pregnant Worker Protections, Non-Compete Order Rescinded, EEOC Right-to-Sue Rule -...

Epstein Becker & Green on

This week, we’re covering four key employer-focused developments: • a ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit challenging the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB’s) authority, • another Fifth...more

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace

Sixth Circuit Departs from EEOC and Other Circuits on Employer Liability Standard for Third-Party Harassment

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace on

On August 8, 2025, a Sixth Circuit panel in Bivens v. Zep, Inc. held that an employer can only be found liable under Title VII for harassment by a third party if the employer intended for the harassment to occur. This...more

Phelps Dunbar

Fifth Circuit Validates Remote Voting and Reinstates Enforcement of Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

Phelps Dunbar on

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on August 15 issued a significant ruling that reinstates the enforcement of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) against the State of Texas effective immediately. This...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

If You See Something, Do You Fix It If It Isn’t Your Employee? 6th Circuit Applies Higher Standard to Non-Employee Harassment Case

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

An employee tells you a customer just harassed them — what should you do? In Bivens v. Zep, Inc. the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals charts its own course in addressing employer liability for third-party harassment. The Equal...more

Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL

No Intent, No Liability: Sixth Circuit Narrows Employer Liability for Third-Party Harassment

Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL on

Most employers understand their obligation to prevent discrimination and harassment at work, and the significant consequences that can come if such treatment is allowed to occur. But what if an employee alleges harassment not...more

Fisher Phillips

SCOTUS Scraps Extra Hurdle in Majority-Group Bias Claims: 5 Ways That Things Will Change for Employers

Fisher Phillips on

The US Supreme Court just unanimously ruled that plaintiffs alleging workplace discrimination under Title VII are not required to meet a heightened evidentiary standard just because they have “majority-group” status....more

Whiteford

Employment Law Update: Ninth Circuit Ruling Reminds Employers They May be Held Liable for Social Media Harassment

Whiteford on

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently ruled, in Okonowsky v. Garland, No. 23-55404, that an employer may be held liable for a Title VII hostile work environment claim based on harassing content posted on an...more

Littler

Littler Lightbulb: May Appellate Roundup

Littler on

This Littler Lightbulb highlights some of the more significant employment law developments in the federal courts of appeal in the last month. Seventh Circuit Finds EEOC Failed to Prove Racial Harassment in Multi-Employee...more

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

Fifth Circuit Weighs in for the First Time Since COVID-19 as to When Remote Work Can Be Reasonable Accommodation

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

Fifth Circuit precedent recognizes the “general consensus among courts” that regular, in-person work is an essential function of most jobs. Yet the continued viability of this premise has been in question, given the ability...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

California Court of Appeal Stresses the Difference Between Substantive and Procedural Unconscionability for Arbitration Agreements

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

In a pair of cases decided by the Second Appellate District of the California Court of Appeal, the Court reiterated the difference between procedural and substantive unconscionability when it comes to invalidating arbitration...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

EEOC Argues For Broader Causation Standard And Provides A Peek Into The EEOC’s Future Focus

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

Legal precedent, including language from the U.S. Supreme Court, requires federal courts to take a broad view of the “but-for” causation standard for determining unlawful age discrimination in the workplace, Equal Employment...more

Fisher Phillips

Web Exclusive: Supreme Court Review: Mixed Bag For Employers

Fisher Phillips on

The 2016-17 Supreme Court term was truly a mixed bag for employers. The Court limited presidential power, reined in the appellate courts’ authority to review and overturn trial court decisions regarding EEOC subpoenas,...more

14 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