Episode 322 -- Checking in on Caremark Cases
The U.S. Supreme Court recently clarified in Stanley v. City of Sanford, No. 23-997, that individuals who have already retired are generally not considered “qualified individuals” eligible to assert claims under the Americans...more
A unanimous Supreme Court decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services clarified that Title VII plaintiffs who are members of a majority group have the same standard for establishing their claim as a plaintiff who is...more
Can members of a majority group be subject to a heightened pleading standard for their Title VII discrimination claims? The United States Supreme Court answered this question with a unanimous “no” in Ames v. Ohio Department...more
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision holding that “reverse discrimination” claims are not subject to a heightened standard of proof. This decision clarifies the legal standard required for such...more
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, rejecting the “background circumstances” requirement multiple circuit courts of appeals have applied to Title...more
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated the “background circumstances” rule in “reverse” employment discrimination claims brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act in a unanimous decision overturning...more
Real World Impact: The United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in a sex discrimination case as it sided with a straight woman on the standard to be used in pleading disparate treatment on the basis of her...more
In a decision poised to change the landscape of Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) litigation, on April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court held in Cunningham et al. v. Cornell University et al. that a claimant...more
Key takeaway: The Supreme Court held that to state an ERISA prohibited-transaction claim under 29 U.S.C. § 1106(a), a plaintiff needs only to plausibly allege the elements contained in § 1106(a) itself and does not need to...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued one decision today: Cunningham v. Cornell University, No. 23-1007: This case addresses the pleading standard to assert a claim under a provision of the Employee Retirement...more
The United States Supreme Court recently held in E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera that the “preponderance of the evidence” burden of proof applies in determining whether an employee is exempt under the federal Fair Labor...more