1
|
General Category / Law News / Labor & Employment Milwaukee Deputy Sheriffs' Ass'n v. Clarke
|
on: December 04, 2009, 08:56:52 PM
|
Milwaukee Deputy Sheriffs' Ass'n v. Clarke4 December 2009, 7:00 pm(U.S. 7th Cir., Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law & Procedure, Government Law, Labor & Employment Law) In a suit brought by two sheriff deputies under 18 U.S.C. section 1983 alleging a violation of the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment when the sheriff invited a Christian group to speak at a number of mandatory employee meetings, grant of plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on the Establishment Clause claim is affirmed as the religious group's presentations during mandatory employee gatherings gave, at the least, the appearance of endorsement by the sheriff's department, and thus, defendants violated the Establishment Clause. Source: FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Labor LawIf you have a question concerning any legal matter, please give us a call at (518) 465-2211 or visit our main site at www.randallkehoelaw.com.
|
|
|
3
|
General Category / Law News / Labor & Employment Lopez v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts
|
on: December 03, 2009, 08:48:16 PM
|
Lopez v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts3 December 2009, 7:00 pm(U.S. 1st Cir., Administrative Law, Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Government Law, Labor & Employment Law) In minority police officers' disparate impact race claim under Title VII against a state agency that prepares and administers promotional examinations for local police officers under the state civil service system, their employers, various cities, and the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), district court's denial of Eleventh Amendment immunity for the state defendants, the state of Massachusetts and a chief human resources officers of the Human Resources Division (HRD) in his official capacity, is reversed where: 1) the state defendants do not qualify as employers as that term is used in Title VII; 2) HRD cannot be deemed plaintiffs' de facto employer as it exercised no control, direct or indirect, over the factors relevant to the common law agency test; and 3) plaintiffs' alternate theories why HRD should be considered their employer under Title VII are rejected. Source: FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Labor LawIf you have a question concerning any legal matter, please give us a call at (518) 465-2211 or visit our main site at www.randallkehoelaw.com.
|
|
|
6
|
General Category / Law News / Labor & Employment Francis v. Giacomelli
|
on: December 03, 2009, 02:32:26 AM
|
Francis v. Giacomelli2 December 2009, 10:00 pm(U.S. 4th Cir., Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Contracts, Government Law, Labor & Employment Law) In a case brought by a police commissioner and his deputies following a highly public dispute with the mayor of Baltimore resulting in the termination of their employment, dismissal of the action is affirmed as, based on the facts alleged in the complaint, the complaint fails to articulate any claim for relief that is plausible on its face. Furthermore, the mayor, against whom the allegations of due process violations were directed, is entitled to qualified immunity. Source: FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Labor LawIf you have a question concerning any legal matter, please give us a call at (518) 465-2211 or visit our main site at www.randallkehoelaw.com.
|
|
|
10
|
General Category / Law News / Labor & Employment Winslow v. FERC
|
on: December 01, 2009, 06:47:06 PM
|
Winslow v. FERC1 December 2009, 5:00 pm(U.S. D.C. Cir., Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Government Law, Labor & Employment Law, Remedies) In an age discrimination action, the denial of plaintiff's motion for prejudgment interest following a judgment in his favor is affirmed where motions for mandatory prejudgment interest were governed by Rule 59(e) and, therefore, by its 10-day filing requirement, and plaintiff's motion was untimely. Source: FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Labor LawIf you have a question concerning any legal matter, please give us a call at (518) 465-2211 or visit our main site at www.randallkehoelaw.com.
|
|
|
11
|
General Category / Law News / Labor & Employment Roby v. McKesson Corp.
|
on: December 01, 2009, 02:58:26 PM
|
Roby v. McKesson Corp.30 November 2009, 1:00 pm(Cal., Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Injury And Tort Law, Labor & Employment Law, Remedies) In plaintiff's wrongful discharge, harassment and discrimination suit against her former employer and supervisor, court of appeal's judgment is reversed where: 1) the Court of Appeal erred in allocating the evidence between the harassment claim and the discrimination claim, and as such, basing on that allocation, it erred in finding insufficient evidence to support the harassment verdict; and 2) although the court of appeal was correct in holding that the $15 million punitive damages award exceeds the federal constitutional limit, it erred in concluding that in this case the appropriate limit is $2 million as, under the test set forth in State Farm, a one-to-one ratio between compensatory and punitive damages is the federal constitutional limit in this case. Source: FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Labor LawIf you have a question concerning any legal matter, please give us a call at (518) 465-2211 or visit our main site at www.randallkehoelaw.com.
|
|
|
|