U.S. Supreme Court: former employees are entitled to Title VII protection

Article Abstract:

The US Supreme Court ruled, in Robinson v. Shell Oil Co., that former employers were covered by Section 704(a) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), protecting them from retaliation for filing Title VII suits. The case involved a dismissed employee who filed a race discrimination suit and then Shell sent a negative reference to a company at which employee was seeking a job. The 4th Circuit had been holding to a conservative analysis that employees meant only current employees but the Supreme Court believed that interpretation led to an absurd result.

Other Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities, Equal Protection-Employment, Employment, Equal protection, Workers

---

The Supreme Court extends Title VII coverage to small businesses

Article Abstract:

The US Supreme Court's decision on Jan 14, 1997, of 'Walters v Metropolitan Educational Enterprises' and 'Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v Metropolitan Educational Enterprises' indicates that companies must count all employees on the payroll in counting how many are employed on 'each working day' in a given week. Thus, the Court upheld the 'payroll method' of counting employees and rejected the 'day to day' method, resolving a split in the circuit courts and subjecting many more employers to discrimination lawsuits.

Small Business, Legal Protection, Human resource management, Corporate counsel, Jurisdiction

---

The resolution of the after-acquired evidence controversy

Article Abstract:

The US Supreme Court's decision in McKennon v Nashville Banner addressed the question of liability in after-acquired evidence cases, but did not resolve most of the related questions. After-acquired evidence concerns lawsuits claiming unjust discrimination in which the employer, after dismissing the employee on putatively unjust grounds, later finds undeniably valid grounds for a discharge. The controversy had divided the circuit courts, with the 4th, 6th, 8th, and 10th siding with employers and the 3rd and 11th against.

Employee dismissals, Employment terminations, Employment at will, After-acquired evidence (Law), Newly acquired evidence

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: The Dutch Supreme Court reaffirms and clarifies 'de facto employer' under Article 15 of the OECD model. Tax jurisdiction in electronic commerce from the perspective of public international law- a paricular examination of income tax
• Abstracts: Temps use sparks ire in client ranks; some firms are reluctant to disclose markup of rates. Bills fought at fee hearing; Integrated Resources bankruptcy brings rowdy charges of overbilling in N.Y
• Abstracts: Jiminez v. Mary Washington College: the "Mark Fuhrman defense" and Title VII national origin discrimination. Morning sickness: testing the proper bounds of employee protection and employer prerogative under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act
• Abstracts: The EPA is formulating a rule that will expand the types of 'credible evidence' that can prove Clean Air Act violations
• Abstracts: Shopping the tip boutique: from fees to practice management, there are new ideas for everyone. Top bananas turn rainmakers: former corporate lawyers ripe for challenges in their own ventures

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.