By: Loyd Willaford and Clive Pontusson
In Webb v. City of Eufaula, a federal court in Oklahoma ruled that a female employee had offered enough facts and evidence to bring her lawsuit for gender discrimination to trial. Candy Webb was the only woman employed as a Police Officer by the City of Eufaula, and was subjected to different standards of training and fitness than other Officers. She was fired by the Police Department and filed a lawsuit. [Read more…]
By: Loyd Willaford and Clive Pontusson
In Barone v. City of Springfield, a Community Service Officer from Oregon sued her Police Department for violating her free speech rights. Despite the fact that Thelma Barone had been hired to handle complaints of racial profiling by the department, she was fired for speaking out about issues of racial discrimination. The federal Court of Appeals ruled that a last chance agreement offered by her employer was too restrictive, because it did not allow her to share information about the Police Department with the general public.
By: Cynthia McNabb and Clive Pontusson
In a case that was decided on summary judgment, the federal court for the Northern District of Illinois ruled that the City of Chicago did not fail to accommodate or discriminate against Plaintiff, a fire paramedic in violation of the Americans with Disability Act (ADA). Specifically, the Court ruled that the Plaintiff, a fire paramedic with chronic Bell’s palsy employed by the City of Chicago, had failed to show that discrimination was the cause of her being sent to three fit-for-duty evaluations and being placed on involuntary leave.
By: Cynthia McNabb and Clive Pontusson
In Jeannot v. Philadelphia Housing Authority, a federal court in Pennsylvania dismissed the lawsuit of a Police Officer who sued his employer under the Americans with Disabilities Act for retaliating against him because he had a disability. The Court dismissed Jeannot’s lawsuit because he did not prove that he had a disability that would qualify for protection under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Jeffrey Jeannot had been a Police Officer with the Philadelphia Housing Authority for several years. While on patrol with another Officer, Jeannot stopped into a pharmacy to fill a prescription for Adderall. Jeannot was prescribed Adderall by his doctor “so that he could maintain focus necessary for him to perform his duties as a police officer.” Jeannot had previously informed his supervisor that he took Adderall, however had not articulated to his supervisor that such use was for a specific medical condition. Jeannot had also not requested any form of accommodation under the ADA Later, Jeannot’s superiors apparently became suspicious, and required him to submit to a drug test. Jeannot was then suspended from his job for drug use. He filed a lawsuit under the Americans with Disabilities Act. He argued that his concentration issues were a condition that qualified as a disability, that he was nevertheless qualified to be a police officer, and that his employer suspended him because he was disabled. [Read more…]
By: Loyd Willaford and Clive Pontusson
In Montoya v. Morgan, a female employee of a Florida Sheriff’s Department filed a lawsuit for gender discrimination in violation of federal law. Laura Montoya argued that widespread sexism in the Sheriff’s department created a hostile work environment and that she was wrongfully discharged because of gender bias in the Sheriff’s Department. The Court ruled that she had not proven that she suffered from a hostile work environment. However, based on the facts presented, the Court determined that gender discrimination could have been a part of her employer’s decision to fire her. As a result, that component of her lawsuit was allowed to continue.
By: Loyd Willaford and Clive Pontusson
In Christie v. Crawford City Memorial Hospital, the Court of Appeals of Iowa ruled that a lower court had improperly dismissed an EMT-paramedic’s suit for wrongful termination based on retaliation and sexual-orientation discrimination.
By: Loyd Willaford and Matt Baker
In Gloetzner v. Lynch, a U.S. Deputy Marshall brought a suit alleging age discrimination under the ADEA against the U.S. Department of Justice. Marshall brought a number of claims of discriminatory treatment but all but one were all dismissed as having been brought too late. The one claim that the Court did not dismiss as timebarred was Marshall’s claim that he applied to be able to attend a firearms training session but was passed over in favor of a younger colleague. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida granted the defendants motion for summary judgement, holding that the Marshall had not stated a meritorious claim on this.
By: Loyd Willaford and Matt Baker
In Forest Preserve District of Cook County v. Fraternal Order of Police Lodge No. 166, two Forest Preservation sergeants challenged the Forest District’s decision to withhold overtime opportunities from them. The sergeants attempted to work shifts during which only one other sergeant was scheduled. A previous order by the District indicated that two sergeants would always be scheduled for these shifts. Relying on this policy, the sergeants submitted their names for overtime shifts but were denied. The sergeant’s Union challenged the District and an arbitrator issued the sergeants an award. The District appealed and an Illinois appellate court upheld the arbitrator award.
By: Loyd Willaford Matt Baker
In Frakes v. Elba-Salem Fire Protection District, a volunteer firefighter alleged he had been unlawfully terminated after complaining about perceived violations by the Fire District. He argues that his firing was retaliation for complaints about unlawful behavior, and therefore that his First Amendment right to free speech was violated. The United States Federal Court for the Central District of Illinois found that some of his claims had merit and moved for a jury trial.
By: Loyd Willaford and Matt Baker
In Peeples v. City of Detroit, eleven firefighters brought a lawsuit against the City and their Union, arguing that they were laid off for racially discriminatory reasons. The firefighters had been improperly laid off due to a misreading of the CBA by the City. When the firefighter’s Union notified the City of its mistake, the firefighters were reinstated. However, they argue that the decision to lay them off resulted not from a contract dispute, but from racial animus. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan dismissed their claims against both the City and the Union.
