Friday, August 18, 2017
- Seventh Circuit: Addressing an issue of first impression in its Circuit and one in which there is a Circuit split, the court held that neither the issuance of a right-to-sue letter nor the entry of judgment in a lawsuit brought by the individuals who originally filed the charges against an employer bars the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from continuing its own investigation against that employer under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
- DC Circuit: In holding that federal employee properly administratively exhausted two of his Title VII claims, the court held that attachments to a formal EEO complaint are an integral part of the complaint and can independently identify claims for resolution regardless of whether the attachment is also referenced in the body of the complaint itself
- US District Court ME: Noting that threats by an employer against an employee’s status of employment may constitute “adverse employment actions” under the Maine Whistleblowers’ Protection Act whether or not the threats are actually acted upon, the court denied motion to dismiss where complaint alleged plaintiff was threatened with termination, accused of fraud, pressured to sign an agreement to not bring up complaints of discrimination with human resources, transferred to another location an hour from his home, and unfairly disciplined
- Law Court: Oral arguments scheduled for September 12th and 13th include And-17-131 (First Amendment challenge to Superior Court injunction under Maine Civil Rights Act that followed finding that defendant interfered another person’s right to engage in lawful activities because of the victim’s sexual orientation); Cum-17-116 (employer challenge to arbitration award in favor of former employee); Cum-17-54 (whether arbitration clause in retainer agreement with law firm requires arbitration of legal malpractice claim); WCB-16-524 (whether credit for the social security benefits can only be taken at the time the workers’ compensation benefits are paid, and not after the fact); WCB-16-433 (whether employer should be required to pay the cost of medical marijuana for pain relief for work injury)
- Law Court: Claim preclusion applied where there was a sufficient identicality between individual defendants and the Commissioner of the Department of Health and Human Services
- MHRC: Minutes from August 14th Meeting reflect that the Commission is waiting permission to post the Field Investigator position vacated in July
