U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, April 17, 2007
Aroostook Band of Micmacs v. Ryan, No. 06-1127
A magistrate judge's determination that federal law prevents an agency of the state of Maine from enforcing state employment discrimination laws against a Native American tribe is reversed and remanded where: 1) a provision of the federal Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act (MICSA) makes the tribe subject to the laws of the state, abrogating any aspects of tribal immunity which might have prevented application of Maine's employment laws; 2) the later-enacted federal Aroostook Band of Micmacs Settlement Act does not conflict with or repeal the applicable provision of MICSA; and 3) the question in the case is resolved by the federal statutes, and not by Indian common law. Read more...
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, April 17, 2007
Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians v. Ryan, No. 06-1774
In a Native American tribe's suit for declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent the Maine Human Rights Commission from hearing an employment complaint against it, dismissal is affirmed where, even if the tribe were not precluded from bringing the lawsuit based on the outcome of a previous lawsuit against the Commission, it is clear that the tribe would lose on the merits. Read more...
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, April 18, 2007
Freadman v. Metro. Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., No. 06-1486
In a suit under the ADA against a former employer alleging discrimination, retaliation and lack of reasonable accommodation, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case on any of her claims. Read more...
U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 20, 2007
Campbell v. Galloway, No. 06-1038
In case involving discrimination and retaliation claims by former police officer, summary adjudication for defendants on some of plaintiff's claims, but allowing Title VII claims against town and First Amendment and Equal Protection claims against individuals, is reversed as to the First Amendment claims, as the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. Interlocutory appeal of Equal Protection claims is dismissed.
Read more...
U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 20, 2007
West v. AK Steel Corp., No. 06-3442
In a class action lawsuit brought under ERISA by early retirees in a company's pension plan who elected to receive their pension benefits under the plan in the form of a lump-sum payment, partial summary judgment and an award in favor of plaintiffs is affirmed where: 1) there was jurisdiction under ERISA for the claims; 2) each plaintiff was entitled to have his or her lump-sum distribution reevaluated using a whipsaw calculation, plus interest; 3) there was no error in holding that the plan could not use a preretirement mortality discount in performing the whipsaw calculation; and 4) the Pension Protection Act of 2006 is not retroactive in application, and thus, has no effect on this case.
Read more...
U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 18, 2007
Dillard v. Starcon Int'l, Inc., No. 05-4790
In a workplace suit alleging racial discrimination, enforcement of an oral settlement agreement is affirmed where the magistrate judge did not abuse his discretion in holding that the parties had a meeting of the minds on all material terms essential to their settlement since all remaining points of contention were immaterial.
Read more...
U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 20, 2007
US v. Thompson, No. 06-3676
In a case against a section chief in Wisconsin's Bureau of Procurement alleging improper steering of a contract for political reasons, the conviction is reversed where there was no indication that defendant's motives were corrupt for purposes of 18 U.S.C. section 666, and neither an increase in salary for doing what one's superiors deem a good job, nor a feeling of increased job security, is a "private benefit" for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. section 1341.
Read more...
U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 17, 2007
Libel v. Adventure Lands of Am., Inc., No. 06-1711
In an action brought against former employer-amusement park operator under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), ERISA, and state law, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not err in deeming certain facts admitted based on plaintiff's failure to comply with a local rule in responding to statements of undisputed facts; and 2) there was no error in the summary judgment rulings on the claims.
Read more...
U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 16, 2007
Detabali v. St. Luke's Hosp., No. 05-15591
Dismissal of plaintiff's California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) claims against defendant-hospital and imposition of sanctions against plaintiff's attorney are reversed where: 1) the district court erred in finding that the FEHA employment discrimination and retaliation claims were preempted by the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA), and consequently it lacked jurisdiction over the case; and 2) the district abused its discretion in imposing sanctions on attorney as his repleading of the FEHA claims, in contravention of the district court's instructions, preserved them for appeal and his decision clearly had merit.
Read more...
U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 16, 2007
E. Bay Automotive Council v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., No. 04-74997, 04-75871, 05-71144
An affirmative bargaining order issued by the NLRB after nearly eight years of litigation involving employer-automotive dealer and a union is enforced over both the union's and employer's arguments that the NLRB's remedy in this case was either inadequate or inappropriate.
Read more...
U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 16, 2007
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Cmty. Health Servs., Inc., No. 04-9605, 05-9523
In proceedings arising from a labor dispute, applications by the National Labor Relations Board to enforce twin orders against respondent-hospital operator are granted over claims that neither order should be enforced because both stemmed from issues already litigated in a prior Board proceeding or, alternatively, an affirmative bargaining order was improper and unwarranted. Read more...
U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 18, 2007
Holmes v. State of Utah, No. 05-4179, 05-4180, 05-4199
In an action raising Title VII claims of sexual harassment and sexually hostile work environment against plaintiffs' employer, a state agency, summary judgment for employer is affirmed where: 1) most of the acts of alleged sexual harassment or hostile work environment set forth in the complaint occurred were time-barred; 2) to the extent any of the acts charged occurred during the 300-day period preceding the charge, sometimes referred to as the filing period, they were not sufficient by themselves to constitute hostile work environment claims; and 3) those acts did not have a sufficient "relationship" to the acts alleged which occurred outside the 300-day period so as to be part of the "same hostile work environment" under applicable precedent. Read more...
U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 20, 2007
Vila v. Padron, No. 05-13776
In case alleging First Amendment retaliation in the form of failing to renew plaintiff's employment contract, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where plaintiff's speech, criticizing illegal or unethical behavior of defendant and other college officials, was not protected by the First Amendment.
Read more...
U.S. D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, April 20, 2007
American Orient Express Ry. Co. v. Surface Transp. Bd., No. 06-1077
In case involving company that markets and sells vacations aboard vintage railcars, petition for review challenging holding that petitioner company was liable for contributions under the Railroad Retirement Act and the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act is denied as petitioner operates as a common carrier and respondent reasonably concluded it had jurisdiction over it.
Read more...
U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, April 17, 2007
Amber-Messick v. US, No. 2006-5087
In an action brought by the mother of a fourteen-year old "apprentice firefighter" with a fire department following his death in a traffic accident, a judgment in favor of plaintiff finding that she could recover death benefits under the Public Safety Officers' Benefits Act is reversed where the Court of Federal Claims erred in failing to defer to an agency's interpretation of "firefighter."
Read more...
U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, April 18, 2007
Rapp v. Office of Personnel Mgmt., No. 06-3172
A decision terminating former Navy employee's disability annuity is vacated and remanded where there was an insufficient basis upon which to determine whether the Merit Systems Protection Board committed procedural error when petitioner was allowed or required to represent herself before the Board.
Read more...
Supreme Court of California, April 16, 2007
Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Prods., Inc., No. S140308
In the context of workplace-related claims for meal and rest periods, the "additional hour of pay" provided for in Labor Code section 226.7 constitutes a wage or premium pay subject to a three-year statute of limitations, and not a penalty subject to a one-year statute of limitations. Read more...
Read more...
Supreme Court of Texas, April 20, 2007
Holmes v. Kent, No. 04-0729
In an action claiming that petitioner is entitled to payments from an optional annuity elected by his deceased ex-wife as part of her teacher retirement benefits, a ruling against petitioner is reversed where the court of appeals erred in finding that a constructive trust in favor of respondents could be imposed on payments petitioner receives, as petitioner had remained the designated beneficiary of the annuity.
Read more...
Supreme Court of Texas, April 20, 2007
Baylor Univ. v. Sonnichsen, No. 04-0851
In a employment dispute between Baylor University and a women's volleyball coach, a court of appeals' ruling finding that the coach presented sufficient evidence of a fraud claim and that the trial court abused its discretion by sustaining a special exception without giving him another opportunity to amend his pleadings is reversed where: 1) the trial court did not abuse its discretion by sustaining Baylor's special exception on breach of contract claims; and 2) it correctly granted summary judgment in favor of Baylor on the fraud claim.
Read more...
Supreme Court of Texas, April 20, 2007
In re RLS Legal Solutions, LLC, No. 05-0290
A petition for mandamus to compel arbitration of an employment dispute is conditionally granted where the court of appeals erred in holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying employer's motion to compel arbitration of the dispute on the basis that relators used economic duress to force the plaintiff to agree to arbitration.
Read more...
Supreme Court of Texas, April 20, 2007
Baylor Univ. v. Coley, No. 04-0916
In an action claiming that plaintiff's former employer-university breached her contract and forced her to resign from her tenured faculty position by reassigning her responsibilities to others and effectively demoting her, a court of appeals' ruling in favor of plaintiff is reversed where plaintiff presented no evidence the university breached her contract and the jury was properly charged on constructive discharge.
Read more...
Supreme Court of Texas, April 20, 2007
In re Basco, No. 05-0771
In a case in which a doctor sought to disqualify his opponent's attorney because the attorney had to question the work product of his former law partner, a decision denying disqualification is reversed as disqualification was mandatory under the circumstances.
Read more...
California Appellate Districts, April 17, 2007
On-Line Power v. Mazur, No. B189251
Order denying attorney's fees after settlement of action for unpaid wages pursuant to a statutory offer of compromise is reversed where the trial court erred in ruling that the Labor Code provisions ensuring an employee's right to payment of wages did not apply to salaried corporate executives.
Read more...
California Appellate Districts, April 18, 2007
McKinnon v. Otis Elevator Co., No. C051752
In the context of workers’ compensation and an employer’s subrogation action against an alleged third-party tortfeasor, when an employer fails to adequately notify its employee of its subrogation lawsuit and proposed settlement involving the alleged third-party tortfeasor and fails to obtain the employee’s consent to the settlement of that suit, and when the settling alleged third-party tortfeasor, prior to settlement, was or reasonably should have been aware of the possibility of the employee’s claim for damages against the tortfeasor, the alleged tortfeasor cannot use the mere settlement and dismissal of the employer’s subrogation action to bar the employee from maintaining their own action for damages against the alleged tortfeasor.
Read more...
California Appellate Districts, April 19, 2007
Andersen v. WCAB, No. B191064
In case where petitioner sustained industrial injuries while working for respondent-city, respondent-board's conclusion that city did not violate the anti-discrimination provisions of Labor Code section 132a is annulled as city violated section 132a by requiring petitioner to use his earned vacation time rather than sick leave to attend medical appointments to care for his industrial injuries.
Read more...
Back to newsletter list
