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 24, 2015
- US Supreme Court: The Court held that, to establish an excessive force claim under the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause, a pretrial detainee must show only that the force purposely or knowingly used against him was objectively unreasonable, not that the officers were subjectively aware that their use of force was unreasonable
- Second Circuit: The court held that filing a Title VII complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission before filing suit is not a jurisdictional requirement, and plaintiff may have been excused from doing so based on the equitable doctrines of futility (plaintiff alleged transgender discrimination, which the EEOC at the time had taken a firm stand that Title VII sex discrimination did not cover) and reasonable relatedness (to plaintiff’s previously-filed EEOC complaint)
- Third Circuit: The court reversed summary judgment for employer who rejected FMLA request based on physician certification that was vague, ambiguous, or non-responsive without allowing plaintiff seven calendar days to cure the deficiency (finding inapplicable the First Circuit precedent that employers have no responsibility to conduct further investigation when a certification is invalid on its face), despite the fact that plaintiff was not diagnosed with FMLA-qualifying conditions of diabetes and high blood pressure until after her termination
- US District Court ME: Magistrate Judge denied joint motion to waive issue of mootness, finding § 1983 and Declaratory Judgment Act claims challenging Maine Department of Corrections “No Contact Policy” moot because former inmate was no longer incarcerated, and the parties could not waive issues of subject matter jurisdiction
Friday, June 19, 2015
- Law Court: In reversing summary judgment for national fraternity on premises liability claim arising out of sexual assault at local chapter, the court held that national fraternity had a duty to exercise reasonable care and take reasonable steps to provide premises that are reasonably safe and reasonably free from the potential of sexual misconduct by its members, for all social invitees to chapter-sponsored events
- US District Court ME: In granting motion to dismiss Maine Human Rights Act public accommodations race discrimination claim brought by caucasian taxi driver against City of Portland for discriminatory issuance of permits allowing only certain taxi drivers to collect passengers at the Portland International Jetport without prior reservations, the court held that the taxi permitting system was not a place of public accommodation protected by the MHRA
- First Circuit: The court held that an allegation that a party was induced to sign a contract containing an arbitration clause through duress is subject to arbitration unless the challenge is to the arbitration clause itself
- Fourth Circuit: The court held that employer that refused to accommodate blind employee at a cost of between $129,600 and $648,000 (competing expert opinions on cost) was not entitled to summary judgment on “undue hardship” defense under Section 504 of Rehabilitation Act; the court also joined the majority view among Circuit Courts of Appeals that litigants asserting public employment discrimination claims against their state and local government employers cannot rely on Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act
- Fourth Circuit: The court held that police officers who reported misconduct by police chief to the governor engaged in protected activity under the First Amendment despite argument that they were just doing their jobs as police officers
Wednesday, June 17, 2015
- Maine Supreme Judicial Court: Chief Justice Leigh Saufley Appoints Justice Roland Cole to Lead the Maine Superior Court
- First Circuit: In finding police officer was entitled to qualified immunity in Fourth Amendment claim arising out officer shooting plaintiff as he sped away in his car, the court held that the test is not whether a person was actually directly in the path of the car, but whether it was reasonable for the officer to believe–at the point when events were rapidly unfolding–that someone was at risk of serious physical harm
- US District Court ME: The court granted plaintiffs’ motion to conditionally certify Fair Labor Standards Act collective action seeking unpaid wages and overtime wages for lag time while logging into software, rest breaks, and bathroom breaks
- MHRC: July 13 Commission Meeting Agenda posted
- Press Herald: Justice Roland Cole named chief of Superior Court in Maine
- Press Herald: Maine House rejects bill to outlaw discrimination against unvaccinated
Thursday, June 11, 2015
- Superior Court: Summary judgment for employer denied on sexual harassment claim where supervisor called plaintiff a “bitch” on multiple occasions, yelled at her, tried to intimidate her, stood uncomfortably close to her, and threatened her by saying “you better watch out”
- Superior Court: In granting motion for summary judgment on negligence claim, the court held that owner of property abutting public sidewalk where plaintiff slipped and fell on untreated ice and snow did not owe plaintiff a duty of care as a “possessor” of the sidewalk (meaning by occupancy manifested an intent to control it) where only evidence of an intent to control was a curb cut allowing deliveries
- First Circuit: In affirming summary judgment for employer on Maine Whistleblowers’ Protection Act claim, the court held that plaintiff failed to show employer’s nondiscriminatory reason for firing plaintiff for drug diversion was pretextual despite plaintiff’s evidence that she did not, in fact, divert drugs, because “evidence of a decisionmaker’s mistaken judgment is not dispositive of the question of pretext unless that evidence would permit the factfinder to conclude that the stated nondiscriminatory justification for the adverse employment action was either knowingly false or made in bad faith”
- US DOJ: New guidance document, “ADA Update: A Primer for State and Local Governments,” provides general guidance to assist State and local governments in understanding and complying with the ADA’s requirements
- US DOJ: Letter finds that Amtrak discriminated against persons with disabilities in violation of the ADA by failing to make existing station facilities in its intercity rail transportation system, for which it is responsible, accessible
- EEOC: In third lawsuit filed by EEOC under Title VII alleging that gender identity discrimination constitutes sex discrimination, EEOC alleges employer refused to let transgender employee use the women’s restroom and supervisors and coworkers subjected employee to a hostile work environment, including hurtful epithets and intentionally using the wrong gender pronouns to refer to her
- US District Court ME: In overruling objection, the court held that Magistrate Judge’s decision granting motion to amend complaint to include additional parties was a non-dispositive pretrial matter and would only be corrected if it was “clearly erroneous or is contrary to law”
- US District Court ME: In dismissing corporate plaintiff’s claims, the court made “an ‘informed prophecy’ that the Law Court would not recognize a corporation’s right to maintain an action for false light invasion of privacy”
- Superior Court: In denying motion to enlarge time to file 80B motion, the court held that plaintiffs’ failure to file Superior Court appeal within 30 days of Planning Board decision in reliance on appeal form on town’s website indicating that Board of Appeals took appeals from Planning Board decisions did not constitute “excusable neglect” where town ordinance (also available on the website) had subsequently been amended to eliminate the right to appeal to the Board of Appeals
- US Supreme Court: Certiorari granted to decide two questions addressing circumstances under which class action may be certified or maintained under Rule 23(b)(3), or a collective action certified or maintained under the Fair Labor Standards Act
Saturday, June 6, 2015
- OPM: Guide released titled “Addressing Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Discrimination in Federal Civilian Employment: A Guide to Employment Rights, Protections, and Responsibilities” provides basic and general information about the various procedures and the circumstances under which federal applicants and employees may be able to take a particular course of action if they believe they have been discriminated against because of their sexual orientation or gender identity
- US DOL: Staples to pay fired employee $275K in wages, benefits, and damages after failing to inform him of job protections to care for ill family member
- EEOC: Employer liable for disability discrimination when it withdrew its initial job offer to experienced oil rig worker because he had no vision in his left eye ordered to pay $15,000 in compensatory damages for emotional pain and distress and $230,619 in back pay
- Kennebec Journal: Women seeking damages after alleged 2012 sexual misconduct by doctor in Waterville
Wednesday, June 3, 2015
- US Supreme Court: The Court held that an employer violates Title VII if an applicant actually requires an accommodation of a religious practice (that would not impose an undue hardship) and the employer’s desire to avoid the prospective accommodation is a motivating factor in its decision to refuse to hire the applicant, regardless of whether the employer had actual knowledge of the need or simply a belief, and regardless of whether the employer was relying on a neutral policy (here one that prohibited wearing “caps”)
- US Supreme Court: The Court held that it was not clearly established at the time of inmate’s death by suicide that an incarcerated individual had an Eighth Amendment right to the proper implementation of adequate suicide prevention protocols, thereby entitling defendants to qualified immunity on Eighth Amendment claims
- US District Court ME: Magistrate recommended summary judgment on inmate’s Fourteenth Amendment claim arising out of assault by another inmate who had a court order prohibiting contact with plaintiff where there was no evidence that defendants were aware that the court order was imposed out of a safety concern and not because they were co-defendants
Saturday, May 30, 2015
- US DOL: Employer will pay $115,000 to settle claim that it engaged in systemic hiring discrimination by utilizing a dexterity test in its selection process that was not supported by a validation study that satisfied the “Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures,” which are joint guidelines issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Civil Service Commission, the Department of Labor, and the Department of Justice designed to prevent discrimination on grounds of race, color, religion, sex, and national origin by providing a framework for determining the proper use of tests and other selection procedures
- Tenth Circuit: Resolving an unsettled question, the court held that the Title VII requirement that a complainant verify a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is non-jurisdictional and does not divest the federal courts of subject-matter jurisdiction
- US District Court ME: Magistrate Judge recommended denying summary judgment in employment disability discrimination claim because plaintiff’s request for a leave of absence was not indefinite where she told employer that her goal was to return to work full time without restrictions in approximately four weeks (although unsupported by a medical report), and termination for absenteeism caused by disability was termination because of disability
- MHRC: June 1st Commission Meeting Agenda and Consent Agenda posted
May 27, 2015
- Press Herald: LePage nominates three judges to Maine Superior Court
- US District Court ME: In denying, in part, motion to exclude plaintiff’s expert in negligence action involving a fall on stairs, the court held that the fact that the building code on which the expert relied was inapplicable to defendant (a small town) did not render his opinion unreliable where he used the code to establish a “general safety standard”
- HUD: $169,500 settlement reached in Fair Housing Act case in which landlord required residents with disabilities who use motorized wheelchairs or scooters to pay a $1,500 security deposit and acquire a minimum of $100,000 in liability insurance
Saturday, May 23, 2015
- Fourth Circuit: In reversing summary judgment for employer on Title VII retaliation claim, the court held that the Supreme Court’s decision in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, which eliminated mixed-motive liability in retaliation cases under the motivating factor test, did not alter the application of but-for causation in McDonnell Douglas pretext retaliation cases
- Fourth Circuit: In reversing summary judgment for prison based on inmate’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies on § 1983 claim as required by the Prison Litigation Reform Act, the court adopted a two-prong exception to administrative exhaustion where first, the prisoner was justified in believing that his complaints in the disciplinary appeal procedurally exhausted his administrative remedies because the prison’s remedial system was confusing, and second, the prisoner’s submissions in the disciplinary appeals process exhausted his remedies in a substantive sense by affording corrections officials time and opportunity to address complaints internally
- US District Court ME: The court, in part, denied police officer’s motion for summary judgment on First Amendment claim arising out of arrest during traffic stop, finding a factual question whether officer unconstitutionally arrested plaintiff for his utterances about not hurting his brother or legitimately arrested him for disorderly conduct
- Bangor Daily: Jury awards Minot couple nearly $10 million for misread Pap smears
- EEOC: $100,000 settlement reached in lawsuit alleging sex discrimination by restaurant that posted announcement that only females would be considered for temporary summer positions with company-provided housing purportedly because of concerns about housing employees of both genders together
