In Williams v. Ala. Dep’t of Corr., an Alabama District Court held that an African-American correctional officer failed to prove that he was terminated on the basis of race. Even though the officer tried to show that the white officer was treated differently, the Court was not convinced the two officers were similarly situated.
In Cox v. Onondaga Cnty. Sheriff’s Dep’t, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of retaliation complaints by white Deputy Sheriffs (located in the state of New York). Even though the Deputies had set forth a prima facie case of retaliation, the Sheriff’s Department was able to demonstrate non-retaliatory reasons for its actions. The Deputies were unable to rebut the Department’s non-retaliatory explanations with evidence of pretext.
In Morshed v County of Lake, the Court held that years of slurs and constant denigration were enough to allow Police Officer Morshed to pursue a national origin harassment claim even though he lost no pay or benefits.
In Ellis v. Houston, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled, in part, in favor of five African-American Correctional Officers who brought claims against five of their Supervisors for race-based harassment and retaliation.
In Ellis v. Houston, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of five African American corrections officers who brought claims against five of their supervisors for race based harassment and retaliation. The appellate court ruled that the officers’ claims stated a cause of action and reversed a district court ruling that had dismissed all the allegations.
In Waters v. City of Dallas, the Fifth Ciruit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court ruling dismissing a Dallas Police Lieutenant’s racial discrimination claim.
In Stokes v. Dallas County Juvenile Dep’t, 20, WH Cases 2d 327 (5th Cir. 2013) the Fifth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals upheld summary judgment on retaliation claims under both Title VII and the FMLA when the plaintiff could indicate no connection between her termination and the activities protected by both those statutes. Further the employer provided substantial evidence supporting the termination of the plaintiff, including numerous instances of poor performance that resulted in discipline. Although the plaintiff could make a prima facie case regarding the FMLA claim (but not the Title VII claim), the court nevertheless found summary judgement was proper when no reasonable person could find that discrimination had occurred.
In Bonenberger v. St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department, Plaintiff David Bonenberger, who is white, claims that two lieutenants conspired to promote another candidate over him based on her race. On summary judgment, the court viewed the evidence in a light most favorable to Bonenberger and found that a jury could reasonably conclude two lieutenants conspired against him, and therefore concluded the case could go to trial.
In Salvato v. Smith, the court denied the City’s motion to dismiss a female police officer’s harassment claim. The court found the Officer successfully alleged her superior officers’ behavior was “sufficiently severe or pervasive” enough to alter the conditions of her employment. The court found the Officer’s Complaint was brimming with allegations regarding the hostile conduct she suffered, including:
In Primas v. District of Columbia, the D.C. Court of Appeals overruled the lower trial court for dismissing a female, African-American Police Commander claims of sex and race discrimination, and remanded them for trial. The Court ruled that the Plaintiff’s complex theories on a manipulated retirement had sufficient merit to survive a summary judgment motion
