|
Supreme Court
Michael
Foreman Briefs National Press on Employer Liability
for Discrimination in BCI Coca-Cola Case
On April 5, 2007, Michael Foreman of the Employment
Discrimination Project participated in a national press
briefing hosted by the American Constitution Society
to discuss the potential impact of the BCI Coca-Cola
v. EEOC case then slated for Supreme Court oral argument.
Though the case has since been dismissed at the request
of the defendant, those present at the briefing agreed
that a decision on the issue would have significant
impact in the workplace. Mr. Foreman’s commentary
reflected the work done to define a fair standard on
the issue in the Lawyers’ Committee’s amicus
brief for the case, which argued that an employer is
liable under Title VII when the supervisor’s discriminatory
animus is a motivating factor in the adverse employment
decision.
|
BCI
Coca Cola Bottling Company of Los Angeles v. Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission
Joined by eight prominent civil rights groups, the Lawyers'
Committee filed a Supreme Court brief on March 27, 2007,
to vindicate the rights of an African American employee
who was discriminatorily terminated due to information
provided by a biased supervisor to human resources officials.
The brief argues that the termination violated Title
VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits
discrimination in the workplace. The Lawyers’ Committee
asserts that employers must be held accountable whenever
race motivates the termination of an employee. The Supreme
Court will hear oral argument in the case on April 18,
2007.
Amicus
Brief
Press Release
Video |
Burlington
Northern and Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Sheila White
Joined by several prominent civil rights groups, the
Lawyers' Committee filed a Supreme Court brief in a
case that determined what type of employer conduct constitutes
unlawful retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964. The Supreme Court adopted the position
of the Lawyers' Committee and held that any action that
is reasonably likely to deter an employee from pursuing
a discrimination claim or supporting another employee's
discrimination claim is retaliation.
Amicus
Brief
Decision
Press Release
|
Domino's
Pizza, Inc. v. John McDonald
Along
with a number of prominent civil rights and minority
business organizations, the Lawyers' Committee filed
a Supreme Court brief, in the case of Domino's Pizza,
Inc. v. John McDonald. The brief argued that a minority
business owner can assert his individual rights under
§ 1981, separate and apart from the claims of his
corporation, to challenge open and intentional discrimination
that resulted in distinct personal harm.
Amicus
Brief
|
IRS
v. Banks/Banaitis
Joined by a number of civil rights organizations, the
EDP urged the U.S. Supreme Court to hold that a prevailing
plaintiff should not bear the financial burden of paying
taxes on the fee award to the attorney.
Amicus Brief
Decision |
Pennsylvania
State Police v. Suders
Joined by nine of the nation's premier civil rights
organizations, EDP urged the Supreme Court to decide
that the behavior of Mrs.Suders supervisors left her
with no choice but to resign and that her employer is
liable.
Amicus Brief
Decision |
Clackamus
v. Wells
The Lawyers' Committee, along with other civil rights
organizations, filed an amicus brief in the Supreme
Court addressing whether four physician-shareholders,
who perform medical services on behalf of a professional
corporation, are "employees" under the ADA.
Amicus Brief
Decision |
Tennessee
v. Lane
EDP, joined by other civil rights organizations, urges
the Supreme Court to reject further restrictions on
Congress’ power to fight discrimination.
Amicus Brief
Decision
Press
Release |
Arguello
v. Conoco
EDP urged the Supreme Court to resolve the split in
circuits on the proper scope and protection of 42 U.S.C./1981
in the retail context of and address the continuing
discrimination faced by consumers of color.
Amicus Brief
Fifth
Circuit Court of Appeals Decision |
Jones
v. R.R Donnelly
EDP urges the Supreme Court to apply a uniform four
year statute of limitations to all section 1981 claims.
Amicus Brief
Decision |
Desert
Palace Inc v. Costa
EDP urged the Supreme Court to reject the Employer’s
and the Solicitor General's argument that direct evidence
is necessary in order for a plaintiff to be entitled
to “a motivating factor” jury instruction
in a Title VII disparate treatment case.
Amicus Brief
Decision |
Greentree
Financial Corp v. Bazzle
EDP files a brief in the Supreme Court where the court
examines whether the Federal Arbitration Act prohibits
class wide arbitration when the agreement is silent.
Amicus Brief
Decision |
Court
of Appeals
Dukes
v. Wal-Mart
Leading eight other civil rights groups, the Employment
Discrimination Project filed an amicus brief on March
26, 2007, in the landmark sex discrimination case against
Wal-Mart. The brief was filed in support of the 1.6
million women who are pursuing a class action case against
the nation’s largest employer. The brief argued
that the earlier decision of the Ninth Circuit certifying
the class should stand and that the case should proceed
to trial on the merits. The brief also contends that
no employer is so large as to escape justice, and indeed,
the civil rights class action structure was devised
to address exactly this kind of systemic sex discrimination.
Amicus
Brief
Press
Release |
Dukes
v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
(Ninth Circuit)
Leading eight other civil rights groups, EDP filed an
amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit in support of plaintiffs
in this landmark Title VII class action, urging the
court to reject Wal-Mart’s argument that it is
entitled to an individualized hearing for each and every
class member before monetary relief can be ordered thereby
making the class unmanageable for certification.
Amicus
Brief |
Martinez
v. Potter
In conjunction with the National Employment Lawyers
Association and the National Asian Pacific American
Legal Consortium, EDP files an amicus brief in support
of petition of rehearing en banc in the Tenth Circuit
arguing that the Morgan standard does not apply to post-charge
employment retaliation claims.
Amicus Brief
Decision
|
Ocheltree
v. Scollon (Fourth Circuit)
EDP filed a brief in support of the Plaintiff-Appellee,
in a sexual harassment case where the trial court refused
to vacate a $50,000 verdict in which the jury found
that a daily barrage of sexually explicit conversations
and other sexual comments; consistent sexual acts on
a mannequin; and a serenade with a song including vulgar
lyrics was sufficiently severe or pervasive to establish
a hostile work environment.
Amicus Brief
Decision |
Duncan
v. General Motors Corp (Eighth Circuit)
EDP filed a brief in support of the plaintiff's petition
for rehearing en banc where a panel of the Eighth Circuit
threw out a $700,000 jury verdict on the Plaintiff's
sexual harassment claim.
Decision |
Beck
v. Boeing (Ninth Circuit)
EDP joins with other civil rights organizations in filing
an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit addressing the
employer's attack on the trial court class certification
issue.
Amicus Brief
Decision |
|
