News
[02/05]
January unemployment rate drops to 9.7 percent
[02/05]
Job losses from Great Recession about to get worse
[02/04]
Productivity up in 4th quarter as labor costs fall
More...
[02/08]
Nokia to ax 285 jobs in Finland
[02/08]
UPS: Pilots must agree to more cost savings
[02/08]
Failed job seekers add to homeless problem in ND
More...
[02/08]
Reports: Toyota plans to recall 300,000 Priuses
[02/08]
Michael Jackson doctor charged in singer's death
[02/08]
Ex-Intel executive pleads guilty in NYC to fraud
More...
|
Case Summaries
[02/08]
Johnson v. Weld County In an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) action based on defendant's failure to hire plaintiff, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where plaintiff failed to rebut defendant's evidence suggesting that the male candidate it hired as Fiscal Officer had superior qualifications to plaintiff's, as well as its evidence that she was not, at the time of the hiring decision, disabled within the meaning of the ADA.
[02/08]
Covell v. Menkis In plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. section 1983 suit following his termination by a government agency, summary judgment in favor of the defendant is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff failed to sufficiently demonstrate that he had a property interest in his employment because he did not establish that there was a mutually explicit understanding that he could only be terminated for cause; and 2) plaintiff failed to sufficiently demonstrate that the defendant's actions deprived him of a liberty interest.
[02/08]
Turner v. Saloon, Ltd. In plaintiff's employment discrimination suit against his former employer, summary judgment in favor of defendant is affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded where: 1) the judgment of the district court is affirmed to the extent that it dismissed plaintiff's ADA claims, his overtime claims, and his Title VII retaliation claim; but 2) judgment of the district court with respect to plaintiff's hostile-workplace claim based on alleged sexual harassment is reversed and remanded as the court dismissed the claim after excluding most of the alleged instances of harassment as time-barred, contrary to Supreme Court precedent establishing that in a hostile-workplace claim, acts of harassment falling outside Title VII's statute of limitations may be considered as long as some act of harassment occurred within the limitations period.
More...
Frequently Asked Questions
|
|