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...
