Legal Updates
John Gause monitors what’s happening in employment discrimination, civil rights, and tort law. He shares some of what he finds on this page.
Wednesday, June 22, 2016
- Fifth Circuit: The court held that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission may pursue “pattern and practice” claims under Section 706 of Title VII (allowing compensatory and punitive damages), not only Section 707 (allowing only equitable relief), and that it need not name specific aggrieved individuals and investigate and conciliate their individual claims during its pre-suit administrative investigation
- US District Court ME: The court awarded plaintiff $140,010.25 in attorney’s fees following Maine Human Rights Act and Americans with Disabilities Act verdict of $34,285.00 in back pay and $1,400.00 in compensatory damages
- US District Court ME: The court vacated $14,500,000 verdict in defamation lawsuit because plaintiff was domiciled in Haiti at the time he filed suit and an exception to diversity jurisdiction deems American citizens domiciled abroad “stateless” and renders them unable to access the federal courts on the basis of diversity jurisdiction
- First Circuit: The court affirmed dismissal of qui tam action under “first-to-file” rule but held that supplemental state claims should have been dismissed without prejudice after lower court declined to exercise jurisdiction over them
- US Supreme Court: The Court held that Department of Labor regulation interpreting the term “salesman” in overtime exemption for certain employees engaged in selling or servicing automobiles (codified at 29 CFR §779.372(c)(1)) was not entitled to Chevron deference because it lacked a reasoned explication and was inconsistent with the Department’s longstanding earlier position
Friday, June 17, 2016
- Maine Superior Court: The court held that negligence action brought by commercial fisherman who was injured by crate that fell from fish pier while he was standing on commercial fishing boat was a federal maritime tort and barred by three-year statute of limitations
- US Supreme Court: Affirming second (more favorable to plaintiff) jury verdict after court called discharged jury back to correct mistake, the Court held that a federal district court has the inherent power to rescind a jury discharge order and recall a jury for further deliberations after identifying an error in the jury’s verdict
- US District Court ME: In light of the early stage in the litigation, Magistrate recommended that plaintiff be allowed to amend complaint to remove certain defendants from civil rights action without prejudice rather than granting defendants’ motion to dismiss them with prejudice
- Maine Superior Court: In granting motion for summary judgment for defendant on negligence claim arising out of fall on step while plaintiff was exiting parking garage, the court held that there was no evidence that negligence–failing to paint tread or mark it with warning sign–caused plaintiff’s fall
- Maine Superior Court: The court held that the Department of Environmental Protection did not violate the Maine Freedom of Access Law by refusing to produce requested documents that contained confidential informant identity information, work product privilege, and sensitive personnel information
- MHRC: Revised June 27th Commission Meeting Agenda and Consent Agenda posted
Wednesday, June 8, 2016
- Law Court: In lawsuit arising out of multiple deaths from apartment fire, the court reinstated one of the plaintiff estates’ attachments that had priority over the others after being entered on an ex parte motion; despite other estates’ claim that there had not been an “immediate danger that the defendant will damage or destroy the property to be attached” justifying ex parte motion; holding that the court’s only role on hearing challenge to ex parte attachment should have been to determine whether the party receiving it established the elements to obtain an attachment, that is, the likelihood of success in a certain amount, not to evaluate whether the elements were present for the motion to be heard ex parte
- Law Court: Summary judgment was entered for defendants on asbestos-related claims for negligence; failure to warn of defective, unreasonably dangerous goods; and loss of consortium based on insufficient evidence that former shipbuilder had inhaled asbestos from defendants’ products
- US District Court ME: Local Rules changes effective July 1st include, in part, change to Local Rule 16.1 that, in standard track cases, discovery will ordinarily be completed within 5 months and the case scheduled for trial within 7 months after issuance of the scheduling order; and to Local Rule 56 (summary judgment) to include provisions addressing Daubert /Kumho motions
- US Supreme Court: The Court held that judgment bar provision of Federal Tort Claims Act does not apply to suits that are dismissed as falling within an exception to the FTCA
- US Supreme Court: The Court held that courts may not engraft an unwritten “special circumstances” exception onto the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s exhaustion requirement, but that an inmate need exhaust only such administrative remedies as are “available”
Friday, June 3, 2016
- US District Court ME: The court denied former employee’s request for reconsideration of order compelling arbitration pursuant to separation agreement despite AAA charges to employee of $750 filing fee, one-half of $350 administrative fee per hearing day, and one-half of the arbitrator’s fees of $1,000 per day; finding that, although fees may implicate US Supreme Court’s prohibition on arbitration agreements that preclude effective vindication of statutory rights (plaintiff argued that the fees strongly deterred her from seeking relief), the court was bound to follow First Circuit precedent that examination of the effective vindication issue must await the outcome of the arbitration hearing and the final decision by the arbitral tribunal as to who will pay what
- US District Court ME: The court held in IDEA claim that school department’s failure to implement a Specialized Program Individualizing Reading Excellence was a substantive, not procedural, violation; was more than de minimis; and warranted reimbursement for a private LiPS program paid for by parents
- US District Court ME: The court denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment that plaintiff was terminated because of his disability but granted motion that plaintiff was denied a reasonable accommodation or fired for engaging in protected conduct
- EEOC: Proposed Enforcement Guidance on national origin discrimination addresses, in part, job segregation, human trafficking, and intersectional discrimination (discrimination because of the combination of two or more protected bases, e.g. national origin and race)
- Press Herald: Westbrook will pay $100,000 to settle police officers’ gender discrimination suit
- Bangor Daily: Bradley woman sues Bangor police over chase that ended in crash
Wednesday, June 1, 2016
- US Supreme Court: The Court held that the Title VII limitations period for constructive discharge claims runs from the date employee gives notice of her resignation
- US DOL: New overtime rules effective December 1, 2016, will automatically extend overtime pay protections to over 4 million workers within the first year of implementation
- US District Court ME: In denying motion to dismiss Federal Railway Safety Act whistleblower action, the court ruled that “when the Department of Labor has not taken action within the 210 days, the worker notifies the Department of Labor that he will proceed in district court, and a Supervising Investigator then notifies the worker that as a result the Department of Labor will dismiss his claim, there is no thirty-day appeal period applicable whose passage results in the dismissal becoming a final Department of Labor decision that can be reviewed only in the court of appeals”
- Maine Superior Court: After plaintiff settled Maine Human Rights Act sexual harassment complaint with local VFW, the court denied Maine VFW’s motion to dismiss negligent supervision complaint under Workers’ Comp bar because it was not clear that Maine VFW was plaintiff’s “employer,” and under settlement agreement with local VFW despite the settlement agreement including “affiliates” of local VFW
- MHRC: June 27, 2016 Commission Meeting Agenda posted
Monday, May 23, 2016
- US Supreme Court: The Court held that a defendant need not obtain a favorable judgment on the merits in order to be a “prevailing party” entitled to attorney’s fees under Title VII
- First Circuit: In reversing summary judgment for employer on Title VII sexual harassment and retaliation claims, the court held that there was sufficient evidence of sex-based harassment where plaintiff’s supervisor continually stared at her, asked about her personal relationships, and discussed his “Thai girls” (au pairs) and their swimwear choices, as well as physically approaching her and making obscene gestures during a one-on-one meeting; and that plaintiff did not waive retaliation claim even though pro se complaint did not include it among its numbered causes of action where a paragraph asserted that the “[d]efendants did wrongfully, unjustly, and tortiously fire her, as a result of her respectfully informing HR of her complaint against him, and her declining to have sex with him.”
- First Circuit: In affirming decision that police department’s method of selecting officers for promotion did not violate Title VII under disparate impact theory, the court noted in passing that, under the third prong of the test for disparate impact, plaintiffs must “demonstrate a viable alternative and give the employer an opportunity to adopt it.”
- Law Court: In case challenging the amount landowner was paid by the Maine Department of Transportation for property taken by eminent domain, court vacated judgment for plaintiff and remanded case for a new trial after $41,500 jury verdict in plaintiff’s favor (noting that prevailing plaintiffs may appeal judgments in lessor amounts than requested in their pleadings), finding that the Superior Court erred by ruling that the MDOT was not required to provide in discovery those portions of its appraiser’s report appraising other properties taken for the project
Wednesday, May 18, 2016
- US DOJ & DOE: Joint Title IX guidance addressing transgender students explains schools’ obligation to treat students consistent with their gender identity even if their school records or identification documents indicate a different sex; allow students to participate in sex-segregated activities and access sex-segregated facilities consistent with their gender identity; respond promptly and effectively to sex-based harassment of all students, including harassment based on a student’s actual or perceived gender identity, transgender status or gender transition; and protect students’ privacy related to their transgender status under Title IX and the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act
- Third Circuit: The court upheld HUD’s regulatory interpretation that the accessible design requirements of the Fair Housing Act do not apply to buildings occupied for commercial use prior to the effective date of the design requirements but renovated and converted to residential use after the effective date
- Eighth Circuit: In affirming verdict for employee on FMLA claim, the court held that employer denied plaintiff FMLA benefits to which he was entitled by scheduling mandatory overtime hours that were not included in employee’s FMLA-leave allotment yet deducting hours from his FMLA entitlement when he missed an overtime shift
- US District Court ME: In recommending denial of motion for summary judgment on Maine State Prison inmate’s 8th Amendment cruel and unusual punishment claim arising out of assault by another inmate, Magistrate Judge found sufficient evidence of deliberate indifference where case worker and unit sergeant were aware (1) that Plaintiff reported he had been assaulted during a previous stay at the Prison, (2) that the assailant (i.e., “moose”) was still at the Prison, (3) that Plaintiff had seen “moose” upon his arrival at the Prison, (4) that the person Plaintiff alleged to have directed the assault (Mr. Fogg) was still at the Prison, (5) that following the earlier assault, Plaintiff had been threatened with further harm if he returned to the Prison, (6) that Mr. Fogg had others in the Prison whom Plaintiff believed could or would assault other inmates at Mr. Fogg’s request, and (7) that soon after his arrival at the Prison, Plaintiff had been threatened by two other inmates based on their understanding of Plaintiff’s criminal history
- EEOC: Final ADA and GINA rules on employer wellness programs provide, in part, that wellness programs that are part of a group health plan and that ask questions about employees’ health or include medical examinations may offer incentives of up to 30 percent of the total cost of self-only coverage; and no incentives are allowed in exchange for the current or past health status information of employees’ children or in exchange for specified genetic information (such as family medical history or the results of genetic tests) of an employee, an employee’s spouse, and an employee’s children
- Kennebec Journal: Monmouth man’s family sues Belgrade firm over 2014 fatality
Friday, May 13, 2016
- EEOC: New document, “Employer-Provided Leave and the Americans with Disabilities Act,” provides detailed guidance to employers and employees regarding when and how leave must be granted for reasons related to an employee’s disability under the ADA
- First Circuit: In granting HUD Secretary’s petition to enforce order under Fair Housing Act imposing compensatory damages and civil penalty against condominium association for denying tenant’s reasonable accommodation request to keep emotional support dog as exception to “no pets rule,” the court articulated a new standard of review in cases under Administrative Procedures Act in which agency reaches a different conclusion than hearing officer
- US District Court ME: The court held that signed Maine Human Rights Commission Intake Questionnaire with attached typed statement satisfied Title VII administrative charge-filing requirement (and verification could be added later) despite MHRC’s warnings on its website and in its letter to complainant that a complaint would not be considered filed until a sworn complaint was received
- US DOJ: Justice Department Files Complaint Against the State of North Carolina to Stop Discrimination Against Transgender Individuals
- US District Court ME: The court held, in part, that Local Rule 54.2, which allows an application for attorney’s fees to be filed within 30 days of the expiration of the time for filing appeal, applied regardless of whether judgment was entered based on an unopposed motion to dismiss in which plaintiff had waived his right to appeal
- US DOJ Civil Rights Division: Supplemental advance notice of rulemaking issued on revised regulations to establish specific technical requirements to make accessible the services, programs, or activities State and local governments offer to the public via the Web
- Maine Supreme Court: Advisory Committee on the Maine Rules of Appellate Procedure formed
- Bangor Daily: Judge dismisses Rockland man’s lawsuit against landlord over gun possession
- Kennebec Journal: Former Benton code officer sues town on age discrimination, whistleblower charges
Monday, May 9, 2016
- EEOC: $140,000 settlement reached in Title VII claim that higher education technology company complied with college’s request to bar employee from access to her workplace on the college campus the day after she informed her co-workers she planned to transition from male to female
- Kennebec Journal: Former Madison police officers accuse town of age discrimination
- Press Herald: Judge lets Maine man’s Whole Foods discrimination lawsuit proceed
- MDOL: No-cost courses offered in May and June to educate employers and the public about regulations governing the workplace
Thursday, May 5, 2016
- US District Court ME: In ERISA appeal from denial of coverage under group health plan for residential treatment for plaintiff’s mental illness, the court granted summary judgment for plaintiff (reversing denial) and awarded plaintiff attorney’s fees after striking as invalid under Maine law provision in plan purporting to give administrator “final and conclusive” discretion to determine eligibility for benefits, which led to de novo review of the denial
- US District Court ME: In dismissing § 1983 and Maine Tort Claims Act complaint brought by former Maine House Speaker against Governor for making statements and threats that allegedly brought about the termination of plaintiff’s private employment, the court held that Governor was entitled to qualified immunity and MTCA discretionary acts immunity
- US District Court ME: Following jury verdict for defendant in disability employment discrimination claim, Magistrate Judge denied plaintiff’s motion for judgment as a matter of law and for a new trial, finding that even if defendant failed to engage in an interactive process the record would support the jury’s determination that further discussion would not have identified a reasonable accommodation under the circumstances
- US District Court ME: Magistrate Judge conditionally denied defendant’s motion to compel production of plaintiff’s psychotherapist records provided plaintiff did not seek emotional injury damages at trial beyond “garden variety” emotional damages, namely, the distress than any healthy, well-adjusted person would likely feel as a result of being so victimized
