May 7, 2015
By Erica Shelley Nelson and Brennen Johnson
In Smith v. City of New Smyrna Beach, a U.S. Court of Appeals upheld a jury decision awarding a former female firefighter a total of $444,000 in damages for the gender-based discrimination she suffered from the city of New Smyrna Beach, Florida. The female firefighter sued the City for creating a hostile work environment and wrongfully terminating her. At trial, the jury agreed with all of her claims, resulting in the substantial award. Although the City appealed the verdict, the Court of Appeals affirmed the results of the trial, including the substantial monetary award and the female’s reinstatement as a firefighter.
Filed Under: Gender/Pregnancy Discrimination, Race Discrimination
May 6, 2015
By Erica Shelley Nelson and Brennen Johnson
In Raspardo v. Carlone, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit found that qualified immunity protected a Connecticut police chief from claims that his actions and supervision of the city police department created a hostile work environment for women. Three female police officers, two former and one current, sued their police chief, claiming that he failed to properly supervise or investigate the conduct of subordinate police officers who allegedly sexually harassed them. The Court held that qualified immunity protected the police chief from the claim because the female officers could not show that his own actions were sufficient to create a hostile work environment nor that he was grossly negligent in supervising his subordinate officers.
Filed Under: Gender/Pregnancy Discrimination, Race Discrimination
April 28, 2015
By Erica Shelley Nelson and Brennen Johnson
In Michael v. City of Troy Police Dep’t, a U.S. District Court dismissed a lawsuit for disability discrimination brought by a former police officer against the City of Troy, Michigan. In his lawsuit, the Officer claimed that the police department wrongly believed he was disabled and then placed him on unpaid leave based on that belief. He also claimed that the City failed to provide any reasonable accommodations for what it perceived to be a disability before placing him on leave. The Court determined that the lawsuit should be dismissed because the Officer was not entitled to a reasonable accommodation and, even if he was, the City had legitimate reasons for denying those accommodations to the Officer.
Filed Under: Disability Discrimination
April 28, 2015
By Erica Shelley Nelson and Brennen Johnson
In Allen v. Schiff, a U.S. Court of Appeals determined that a random drug testing procedure did not violate a New York correctional officer’s Fourth Amendment rights. The former correctional officer sued Sullivan County, New York, claiming that the County violated her privacy rights when it required her to perform a random, intrusive urine test for drugs. The Court found that the random testing did not violate the officer’s Constitutional rights because the corrections officer had a substantially diminished expectation of privacy, the drug test “was intrusive but not inappropriately so,” and the County had a compelling interest in effecting the test.
Filed Under: Privacy Rights
April 22, 2015
By Reba Weiss and Brennen Johnson
In Sherman v. County of Suffolk, a U.S. District Court determined that a former correctional officer presented legitimate allegations that the County of Suffolk, New York, discriminated against him based on his disability. In his lawsuit, the former officer alleged that the County discriminated against him based on a leg injury he sustained during training as a recruit. The County then filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that there was no evidence to prove that discrimination was the reason that the former officer lost his job. Although the County convinced the Court that no medical evidence could support an inference that the Officer actually suffered from a disability, the Court concluded that reliable evidence suggested that the County still perceived him as disabled and fired him because of that perception.
Filed Under: Disability Discrimination
April 16, 2015
By Erica Shelley Nelson and Brennen Johnson
In Fuller v. Idaho Department of Corrections, a U.S. District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the Idaho Department of Corrections (IDOC), finding that it did not violate the rights of a former corrections officer. The female officer sued the IDOC, alleging sexual harassment and discrimination. Although the officer was assaulted and raped by a coworker, the IDOC was not liable when the assaults arose from the employees’ relationship outside the workplace and, upon learning of the incidents, the IDOC immediately began investigating the coworker, barred him from the premises, and ultimately recommended his termination.
Filed Under: Gender/Pregnancy Discrimination
April 16, 2015
Police Officer Makes Plausible Claim That City Retaliated After He Won A Reverse Discrimination Case
By Erica Shelley Nelson and Brennen Johnson
In Smith v. City of Inkster, a U.S. District Court determined that a police officer stated a plausible claim against the City of Inkster, Michigan, and its Mayor and allowed the lawsuit to proceed to trial. In his lawsuit, the Officer claimed that the City retaliated against him by denying his application for disability benefits after he filed a lawsuit. After the City moved for a judgment against the Officer’s lawsuit before trial, the Court determined that the Officer had presented direct evidence supporting his claims and that he deserved to present his case at trial.
Filed Under: Free Speech Rights, Race Discrimination
March 24, 2015
By Mitchell Riese and Mitchel Wilson
In motions before the trial court to dismiss for failure to state a claim, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, in Allred v. City of Carbon Hill, denied the motions and permitted Allred’s claims to go to trial.
Filed Under: Association Rights
March 11, 2015
By Jim Cline
We are following other Labor and Employment Law Blogs on the Web and will bring to your attention some other articles worth reading. Here are some other articles we think are worth a look.
Filed Under: Legal Rights
March 6, 2015
By Mitchell Riese and Mitchel Wilson
In Vicino v. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland denied the defendant employer’s motion for summary judgment because the plaintiff park ranger had sufficiently alleged sexual discrimination. The Court determined that material facts for a jury existed and that summary judgment was improper.
