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.
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
Wednesday, May 20, 2015
- US District Court ME: In granting, in part, and denying, in part, motion for summary judgment on disability discrimination claims by former Postal Service employee under the Rehabilitation Act, the court held that a single incident where plaintiff’s supervisor yelled at him, gestured angrily, and sent him home was not sufficiently severe or pervasive to constitute an actionable “hostile work environment”; but it was sufficient to establish a failure to accommodate claim where plaintiff’s disabling conditions (PTSD, depression, and anxiety) and his corresponding need for an accommodation (that his supervisors avoid confronting him) were either known to the Postal Service or were obvious, making it unnecessary for him to make a direct and specific request for accommodation
- US Supreme Court: After finding that question presented under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act was improvidently granted, the Court held, on Fourth Amendment claim, that police officers who forcibly entered home of woman suffering from a mental illness who had become violent were entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established that their doing so to prevent her from escaping or gathering more weapons would violate the constitution
- Press Herald: Minot woman awarded $7.65 million in malpractice case
Thursday, May 14, 2015
- US District Court ME: In denying defendant’s motion to dismiss federal and state statutory wage claims, the court held, in part, that (1) the collective bargaining agreement did not contain a specific waiver of a judicial forum (as opposed to arbitration) for statutory rights and (2) the Labor-Management Relations Act did not preempt plaintiff’s claims where it did not appear that they depended on an interpretation of the CBA
- United States Courts: Revamped website includes centralized forms database
- EEOC: Construction company agrees to pay $120,000 to settle lawsuit alleging that it illegally refused to hire carpenter with dyslexia by asserting carpenter would present a safety risk
Saturday, May 9, 2015
- Fourth Circuit: En banc court vacated summary judgment for employer in Title VII and § 1981 racial harassment and retaliation claim, holding that two uses of “porch monkey” epithet – whether viewed as a single incident or as a pair of discrete instances of harassment – were severe enough to engender a hostile work environment; and that an employee is protected from retaliation for opposing an isolated incident of harassment when she reasonably believes that a hostile work environment is in progress, with no requirement for additional evidence that a plan is in motion to create such an environment or that such an environment is likely to occur
- US District Court ME: The court dismissed whistleblower complaint brought by United States postal employee, finding that, because she was a Postal Service employee, Plaintiff was barred from asserting claims under the federal Whistleblower Protection Act and the False Claims Act and that her Maine Whistleblower Protection Act claims were preempted by the federal Whistleblower Protection Act
- US District Court ME: In employment discrimination claim against the Maine Department of Corrections, the court granted plaintiff’s motion to amend her complaint to include equal protection and due process § 1983 claims against her former supervisor, finding, in part, that, although defendant did not have the authority to terminate plaintiff, plaintiff’s allegations raised a plausible inference that defendant’s individual conduct directly led to the alleged deprivation, i.e., that defendant set in motion a series of acts by others that he reasonably could calculate would cause others to inflict the constitutional injury in question
Wednesday, May 6, 2015
- US District Court ME: In denying employer’s motion for judgment as a matter of law following $80,000 punitive damages jury award on Maine Whistleblowers’ Protection Act claim, the court applied the “cat’s paw” theory in finding that final decisionmaker would not have terminated plaintiff had it not been for recommendation of high-ranking executive who showed reckless indifference to plaintiff’s rights
- Seventh Circuit: In affirming, in part and reversing in part summary judgment on Fourth and Fifth Amendment claims, Judge Posner parsed the application of the Supreme Court’s decision Heck v. Humphrey, which held that a person who has been convicted of a crime cannot seek damages or other relief under federal law for violation of his rights by officers who participated in the investigation or prosecution of the criminal charge, if a judgment in favor of the plaintiff in the civil suit would necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction or sentence
- Portland Press: Former Moody’s Diner employee sues for religious discrimination
- Bangor Daily: Portland settles police brutality lawsuit for $10,000
Saturday, May 2, 2015
- Maine Legislature: Public hearing scheduled before the Judiciary Committee on Monday, May 4th, on LD 221, An Act to Amend the Laws Regarding Service Animal Housing Accommodations, which would require detailed documentation, allow landlords to charge higher rent and higher security deposits and to require renter’s insurance for an individual with a service animal, and create various new defenses
- Maine Legislature: Public hearing scheduled before the Judiciary Committee on Monday, May 4th, on LD 950, An Act to Prohibit Discrimination Against a Person Who is Not Vaccinated, which would add to the Maine Human Rights Act that “a person, employer or educational institution may not discriminate against an individual because that individual has refused a vaccination”
- Maine Legislature: Public hearing scheduled before the Judiciary Committee on Monday, May 4th, on LD 1003, An Act To Prohibit Discrimination by Employers and Protect the Privacy of an Applicant for Employment, an Employee or an Employee’s Dependents Regarding Reproductive Health Decisions
- US Supreme Court: The Court held that judicial review of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s statutory conciliation requirement is limited to examining whether the EEOC attempted to confer about a charge, and not to what happened (i.e., statements made or positions taken) during those discussions
- Law Court: In affirming summary judgment for the Department of Professional and Financial Regulation in claim brought under the Maine Human Rights Act/Whistleblowers’ Protection Act (“WPA”), the court held that plaintiff had not engaged in WPA-protected activity by reporting that a court reporter had breached the terms of her service contract with the Department regarding the ability to subcontract and whether to provide amplification services for rate hearings
- Law Court: Oral argument scheduled for May 14th on And-14-444, Gerard Brady v. Cumberland County, which will decide whether Superior Court erred in granted summary judgment based on a lack of causal connection between plaintiff’s termination and protected activity under the Whistleblowers’ Protection Act
- MHRC: June 1st Commission Meeting Agenda posted
- Bangor Daily: LePage nominates Humphrey to replace Silver on Maine’s top court
Wednesday, April 29, 2015
- First Circuit: In reversing denial of plaintiff’s Rule 60(b)(6) motion for relief from judgment based on jurors’ knowledge of confidential settlement offer, the court held, in part, that the required “reasonable time” for asserting motion was measured from plaintiff’s knowledge of juror misconduct not from the entry of judgment
- US District Court ME: The court held, in part, that plaintiff’s complaint should not be dismissed even though it did not cite the Maine Human Rights Act as the basis for Whistleblowers’ Protection Act claim
- US District Court ME: Magistrate Judge held, in part, that 80B plaintiff made a sufficient showing of misconduct in his termination proceedings to justify a “trial on the facts”
- Bangor Daily: Taxi driver says Portland discriminated against him because he’s white
- WGME: Maine Human Rights Commission rules dentist discriminated against child
Friday, April 24, 2015
- Sixth Circuit: In affirming $1.5 million verdict on Title VII sexual harassment and retaliation claim, the court held, in part, that a demand that a supervisor cease his/her harassing conduct constitutes protected activity covered by Title VII and there is no requirement that s/he oppose the harassment to a particular official designated by the employer
- Law Court: In affirming summary judgment for attorney on abuse of process claim, the court held that attorney’s letter warning of legal consequences did not constitute a “legal procedure” that is a necessary element of the tort
- US District Court ME: The court ordered defendant to pay $8000 in plaintiff’s attorney’s fees as sanction for violating consent confidentiality order
- EEOC: New ‘Digest of EEO Law’ Issued
Thursday, April 23, 2015
- Supreme Court: The Court held that the Federal Tort Claims Act two-year deadline for filing with federal agencies and six-month deadline for filing in court after administrative denial are subject to equitable tolling
- Second Circuit: The court held that the Fair Labor Standards Act anti-retaliation provision, which makes it unlawful “to discharge or in any other manner discriminate against any employee because such employee has filed any complaint . . . related to” FLSA’s provisions, covers an oral complaint made to an employer and is not limited to complaints to a government agency
- First Circuit: In resolving the question whether a defendant may seek to remove a state-court action to federal court before being formally served, the court held that service is generally not a prerequisite for removal and that a defendant may remove a state-court action to federal court any time after the lawsuit is filed but before the statutorily-defined period for removal ends
- US District Court ME: Magistrate Judge denied police officer’s motion to summary judgment on Fourth Amendment excessive force during arrest claim, finding that a trier of fact could conclude that, while plaintiff was handcuffed and compliant, defendant swore at and threatened him, and then delivered a knee strike rather than simply using a knee stabilization technique to facilitate a search
- US District Court ME: In awarding $60,639.50 in attorney’s fees to plaintiff in unpaid wage case, the court held, in part, that the successful and unsuccessful claims arose from a “common core of facts”, and that it was impossible to accurately separate out plaintiff’s attorney’s work on the successful and unsuccessful claims
- Maine Supreme Court: Proposed amendment to Maine Rules of Small Claims Procedure would make M.R. Civ. P. 52(a), regarding findings of fact, inapplicable to small claims proceedings
- US DOL: Consent judgment awarded 300 employees more than $1.4 million in back wages for, in part, paying straight time wages rather than time and one-half and misclassifying employees as independent contractors
