No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
|
|
- Liliana Matilda Mathews
- 8 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT JUDY F. JONES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. OKLAHOMA CITY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 89 OF OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA, Defendant-Appellee. On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma Hon. Robin J. Cauthron, Chief U.S. District Judge BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE THE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT AND REVERSAL JAMES L. LEE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT Deputy General Counsel OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of General Counsel CAROLYN L. WHEELER 131 M St. NE, Rm. 5NW10P Acting Associate General Counsel Washington, D.C (202) VINCENT BLACKWOOD James.Tucker@EEOC.gov Assistant General Counsel JAMES M. TUCKER Attorney
2 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CITATIONS....i STATEMENT OF INTEREST... 1 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE... 2 STATEMENT OF THE CASE... 2 Statement of the Facts... 2 District Court Decision... 9 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT ARGUMENT THE EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE THAT IS SUFFICIENT TO ESTABLISH A PRIMA FACIE CASE OF AGE DISCRIMINATION AND SUPPORT A FINDING THAT THE DEFENDANT S EXPLANATION FOR THE PLAINTIFF S DEMOTION IS NOT TRUE IS SUFFICIENT, WITHOUT MORE, TO SUPPORT A FINDING THAT DEFENDANT VIOLATED THE ADEA CONCLUSION CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE OF DIGITAL AND PHYSICAL SERVICE i
3 TABLE OF CITATIONS Cases page(s) Doebele v. Sprint/United Mgmt. Co., 342 F.3d 1117 (10th Cir. 2003) Hare v. Denver Merch. Mart, Inc., 255 Fed. Appx. 298 (10th Cir. 2008)... 15, 16 Jaramillo v. Colo. Judicial Dep t, 427 F.3d 1303 (10th Cir. 2005) Jones v. Okla. City Pub. Sch., No (W.D. Okla. Apr. 27, 2009) , Maughan v. Alaska Airlines, Inc., 281 Fed. Appx. 803 (10th Cir. 2008) Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc., 530 U.S. 133 (2000)... 10, Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc., 197 F.3d 688 (5th Cir. 1999) Sanders v. Sw. Bell Tel., L.P., 544 F.3d 1101 (10th Cir. 2008) Swackhammer v. Sprint/United Mgm t Co., 493 F.3d 1160 (10th Cir. 2007)....9, 13, 14 Trujillo v. Pacificorp, 524 F.3d 1149 (10th Cir. 2008) Statutes 29 U.S.C. 621 et seq U.S.C. 623(a)(1) ii
4 42 U.S.C et seq U.S.C. 2000e et seq iii
5 STATEMENT OF INTEREST The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is the agency charged by Congress with the interpretation, administration, and enforcement of, among other federal laws, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. 621 et seq. ( ADEA ), Title VII of the Civil Right Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq., and Title I of the Americans With Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C et seq. This appeal presents the question of whether a plaintiff with a claim of employment discrimination susceptible to analysis under the McDonnell Douglas three-part analytical model may survive summary judgment by presenting evidence sufficient to establish (1) a prima facie case of discrimination and (2) that the defendant s proffered reason is unworthy of belief, without also having to present additional evidence that the protected characteristic was the cause of the alleged discrimination. Because of the importance of this issue to the effective enforcement of the ADEA and other federal antidiscrimination statutes, the Commission respectfully offers its views to the Court
6 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE 1 Whether the district court erred in concluding that despite the presence of evidence sufficient to support a reasonable jury s conclusion that Jones established both a prima facie case of age discrimination and that the school district s proffered explanation for its alleged discriminatory conduct is false, the school district was still entitled to summary judgment because Jones failed to present additional evidence of age discrimination. STATEMENT OF THE CASE A. Statement of the Facts Judy Jones has been an employee of the Oklahoma City Public Schools, Independent School District No. 89 of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma ( District ), since Appellant s Appendix (Apx. ) 43. During her tenure Jones has served in a variety of capacities, including spending fifteen years as the principal of an elementary school. Apx. 43, 44. In July 2002, Jones was promoted to the newly-created position of Executive Director of Curriculum and Instruction. Apx. 51. In this position, Jones reported to one of five Executive Directors in charge of the District s schools and support services. Apx , Jones did not have any disciplinary or performance problems. Apx The Commission expresses no opinion on any other issues presented in this appeal
7 Beginning in late 2006, Jones was questioned by the District s leadership about her retirement plans. First, in December, Manny Soto, an Executive Director with the District and the person to whom Jones reported, asked Jones when are you going to retire? Apx. 181, A few months later, Jones was similarly questioned by several other Executive Directors. In April or May 2007, DeAnn Davis asked Jones on two occasions when she was going to retire. Apx A witness to Davis questioning of Jones about retirement interpreted Davis questions as indicating that things would be better if Dr. Jones would go ahead and retire and that she really ought to consider retiring. Apx During the same time period Linda Toure, the Executive Director to whom Jones reported at that time, and Linda Brown, Interim Superintendent for the school year, also asked Jones when she was going to retire. Apx. 92, , 210, 215. In March or April 2007, the District hired a new Superintendent, John Porter. Apx. 106, 214. Porter began serving as Superintendent on July 1, 2007, but worked for the District during May and June 2007 as a consultant while preparing for his transition into the Superintendent position. Apx Porter claims that as a consultant he worked closely with Interim Superintendent Linda Brown to ensure a smooth transition into the position - 3 -
8 of Superintendent. Apx Porter stated that during this period, he reviewed the organizational structure of the District and determined that reorganization was necessary. Apx Porter claimed that, after he came up with a draft organizational chart, he began working with Interim Superintendent Linda Brown to institute steps to effectuate a new organizational chart that was budget neutral. Apx According to Porter, the changes he determined to be necessary included the creation of a Deputy Superintendent/Chief Academic Officer position, and, most relevant to this case, the elimination of Jones position. Apx Porter states he advised Senior Human Resources Officer, Dr. Mike Shanahan, that it would be necessary to eliminate Jones position. Apx Porter stated that he was solely responsible for the decision to eliminate Jones position. Apx Jones, however, testified that, when she asked Shanahan who specifically made the decision, he answered Brown and Porter. Apx While Brown also testified that Porter was the sole decisionmaker, Apx. 215, she offered a different accounting of her work with Porter and the process that led to the elimination of Jones position. Rather than agreeing with Porter s statement that he worked closely with Brown during the transition period, Brown testified that she only met with Porter very, very - 4 -
9 few times, and it was brief. Apx. 97. According to Brown, Porter s coming in during the transition time was not to sit and meet with me. He was meeting with the board chair, the board members, the community, the business community and whomever he met with. But it was not spent with Linda Brown. Apx Brown further testified that she did not know what Porter s organizational chart was, nor what Porter s intention was with respect to the department previously overseen by Jones after her position was eliminated. Apx Porter s affidavit statement also conflicts with the deposition testimony of Shanahan and Scott Randall, an employee of the District s finance department. While Porter asserted that the elimination of Jones position was related to budgetary reasons, Shanahan testified that he did not recall being informed of any budgetary considerations behind the decision to eliminate the position. Apx Randall testified that he had been in a meeting with Porter discussing the subject of financial justifications for funding the new positions Porter wanted to create. Apx Porter, however, did not ever mention or otherwise represent to Randall that Jones position was being eliminated for budgetary or financial reasons. Apx Randall also testified that, if Jones position were going to be eliminated because of financial or budgetary reasons, that fact would have - 5 -
10 been run by him because he was in the District s finance department. Apx Randall added that Jones position had not been eliminated as of July 1, It was his belief that the position was in fact carried forward to the next school year, because the money for that position was still in the budget for the upcoming school year and that money would not have been there had the position been eliminated. Apx Furthermore, after Jones position had supposedly been eliminated, her staff remained in their positions and were not reassigned or terminated. Apx On June 5 or 6, 2007, Shanahan presented Jones with a letter from the District notifying her that her position had been eliminated effective July 1, 2007, and she would be reassigned to work as an elementary school principal effective August 1, Apx , 287. As a result of her demotion, Jones suffered an immediate loss of vacation benefits, and a substantial salary decrease in the following year. Apx The letter did not indicate where Jones would be working, but the District notified her by subsequent letter dated June 29 of the school to which she would be assigned, with a new effective date of July 12. Apx In its position statement submitted to the Commission during its investigation of Jones charge, the District stated that, at the time of her demotion, Jones was qualified for only one position in the District the - 6 -
11 elementary school principal position to which she was reassigned. Apx However, Shanahan testified that there were several other positions open for which Jones was qualified, including the Regional Executive Director position left vacant upon Soto s retirement a position that, unlike Jones new principal job, would not have been a demotion. Apx Shanahan also testified that he assumed Porter would have been aware of this opening. Apx Supporting that assumption, Shanahan noted that this particular position was still on the District s organizational charts in June, and was never taken off to his knowledge. Apx In the letter Jones received from the District notifying her of her demotion, she was offered the opportunity to apply for other positions an offer inconsistent with the District s assertion in its position letter that she was only qualified for the elementary school principal position. Apx Jones declined to apply for any other positions, however, because to do so she would have to apply through the very people making these decisions to eliminate her job. Apx In late July 2007, after Jones had been reassigned, Porter promoted Elois Brooks, who was roughly the same age as Jones, to the position of Acting Deputy Superintendent. Apx Porter stated that, after Brooks became Acting Deputy Superintendent, it became apparent that there was - 7 -
12 an immediate need to have an individual in the position of Director of Teaching and Learning. Apx The Director of Teaching and Learning position was ostensibly created by Porter as part of his reorganization of the District, but the duties and responsibilities of this new position were strikingly similar to those of Jones prior position. District Senior Human Resources Officer Shanahan testified that the two positions were closely related with curriculum and instruction very integral parts of both job responsibilities, with both responsible for staff development. Apx The written job descriptions themselves both provide that the primary qualification for each position is a Master s Degree in Curriculum and Instruction, with a doctorate preferred. Apx Each also specifies that the duties of the positions involve taking a leadership role in providing professional development services to the District s teachers, evaluating instructional methods and recommending changes where necessary, developing collaborative relationships with external partners, and coordinating textbook ordering and distribution. Apx In August 2007, Sandra Park, who is thirteen years younger than Jones, submitted a job application to the District for the position of Regional Executive Director. Apx , 117, 125. Park initially interviewed with - 8 -
13 Brooks for this position, but Porter conducted a follow-up interview during which he instead offered Park the position of Director of Teaching and Learning. Apx Park accepted the position and began work in September Apx B. District Court Decision In granting the District s motion for summary judgment, the district court determined that Jones had established a prima facie case of age discrimination, as her reduction in pay, benefits, and prestige were sufficient to make her reassignment an actionable adverse employment action. 2 Apx The court recognized that the District had articulated a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its action that eliminating Jones position allowed Porter to create a new position in a revenue-neutral manner. Apx The court also noted the District s assertions that Porter combined some of the duties from Jones prior position with additional duties and created a new position, and that Porter reassigned and/or promoted at least 2 On summary judgment, the only element of Jones prima facie case that the District challenged was whether she suffered an adverse employment action. Apx. 30. The District stated that it did not challenge that Jones was a member of the protected class or that she was performing her job satisfactorily. Apx. 30. In addition, it made no challenge on what this Court has identified as the critical element of whether the reassignment took place under circumstances which give rise to an inference of unlawful discrimination. Swackhammer v. Sprint/United Mgm t Co., 493 F.3d 1160, 1166 n.8 (10th Cir. 2007)
14 six people over the age of fifty (and Porter himself was fifty-six). Apx Turning to the issue of pretext, the court recognized that evidence that the funding for her position continued after the position was supposedly eliminated, that the staff supporting that position remained employed in that capacity, and the similarity of the old and new positions, was sufficient for a jury to find the District s explanation unworthy of belief. Apx However, citing Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc., 530 U.S. 133 (2000), and Tenth Circuit precedent, the court stated that there are cases in which there is sufficient evidence to reject the defendant s explanation but insufficient evidence from which a rational factfinder could conclude the challenged action was discriminatory. Apx The court characterized the evidence of pretext in this case as not particularly strong, and noted that, particularly fatal to Plaintiff s case, there was a lack of evidence suggesting age discrimination. Apx The court stated that the only evidence suggesting age discrimination was the questioning Jones had received about her retirement plans, and only one of the questioners Linda Brown was arguably involved in Jones reassignment but [d]efendant strongly argues she had no role in the decision process. Apx The court added that Brown had testified that she had no role, and that while Jones argued that Shanahan had stated that others were also involved,
15 Jones offer[ed] no additional evidence suggesting that her age played a role regardless of who was involved. Apx The court concluded that no rational juror could find in her favor. Apx SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT In granting the school district s motion for summary judgment, the district court applied an incorrect evidentiary standard in essence, a pretext-plus standard that has been flatly rejected by both this Court and the Supreme Court. The law is well-settled that a plaintiff prosecuting a claim of employment discrimination based on circumstantial evidence can survive summary judgment by doing precisely what the district court concluded that Jones had done in this case presenting sufficient evidence to establish both a prima facie case of discrimination and that the defendant s asserted reason for the alleged discrimination is false. However, despite the district court s conclusion to the contrary, Jones did not need to present any additional evidence of age discrimination in order to survive summary judgment. While this Court and the Supreme Court recognize that in certain rare circumstances this minimum showing may not suffice to forestall summary judgment, those circumstances are not present in this case. For these reasons, the district court s grant of summary judgment constituted reversible error
16 ARGUMENT THE EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE THAT IS SUFFICIENT TO ESTABLISH A PRIMA FACIE CASE OF AGE DISCRIMINATION AND SUPPORT A FINDING THAT THE DEFENDANT S EXPLANATION FOR THE PLAINTIFF S DEMOTION IS NOT TRUE IS SUFFICIENT, WITHOUT MORE, TO SUPPORT A FINDING THAT DEFENDANT VIOLATED THE ADEA In this case, the district court deviated from well-settled law in granting summary judgment to the District. Under the clear precedent of this Court and the Supreme Court, as soon as the district court determined that the record contains sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to conclude that there is a prima facie case of age discrimination and that the District s proffered explanation for its decision to demote Jones was false, the court s inquiry should have been at an end and the District s motion should have been denied. Instead, the court imposed a heightened evidentiary burden on Jones, requiring that she also present additional evidence of age discrimination beyond that necessary to establish her prima facie case and the falsity of the District s proffered explanation and granted summary judgment against her because she had not met this heightened standard. This de facto imposition of the discredited pretext plus standard on Jones was incorrect as a matter of law, and constitutes reversible error. Section 4(a)(1) of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ( ADEA ) makes it unlawful for an employer to fail or refuse to hire or to
17 discharge any individual or to otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual s age. 29 U.S.C. 623(a)(1). This Court applies the McDonnell-Douglas burden-shifting framework when reviewing a district court s grant of summary judgment on claims under 4(a)(1). Sanders v. Sw. Bell Tel., L.P., 544 F.3d 1101, 1105 (10th Cir. 2008). That is, in the absence of direct evidence, if there is sufficient circumstantial evidence to permit a reasonable jury to find that there is a prima facie case and that the employer s nondiscriminatory explanation for the contested action is pretextual, summary judgment should be denied. Id. The Supreme Court has held that, in all but the most exceptional circumstances, summary judgment should be denied in an ADEA disparate treatment claim if the evidence is sufficient to permit a reasonable jury to conclude that the plaintiff established a prima facie case and that the defendant s proffered reason for its action is false. Reeves, 530 U.S. at [A] plaintiff s prima facie case, combined with sufficient evidence to find that the employer s asserted justification is false, may permit the trier of fact to conclude that the employer unlawfully discriminated. Id. at 148; see also Swackhammer v. Sprint/United Mgm t Co., 493 F.3d 1160, 1168 (10th Cir. 2007) ( in order to survive summary judgment, a plaintiff generally
18 need not provide affirmative evidence of discrimination beyond the prima facie case and evidence that the employer s proffered explanation is pretextual ) (citing Jaramillo v. Colo. Judicial Dep t, 427 F.3d 1303, 1312 (10th Cir. 2005); Doebele v. Sprint/United Mgmt. Co., 342 F.3d 1117, (10th Cir. 2003)). No additional evidence is necessary, the Court explained, because rejection of the defendant s proffered reasons will permit the trier of fact to infer the ultimate fact of intentional discrimination. Reeves, 530 U.S. at 147; see also Trujillo v. Pacificorp, 524 F.3d 1149, 1160 (10th Cir. 2008) (same). This is because [p]roof that the defendant s explanation is unworthy of credence is simply one form of circumstantial evidence that is probative of intentional discrimination, and it may be quite persuasive. Reeves, 530 U.S. at 147. Moreover, once the employer s justification has been eliminated, discrimination may well be the most likely alternative explanation, especially since the employer is in the best position to put forth the actual reason for its decision. Id. In accordance with the holding in Reeves, this Court has definitively rejected a pretext plus standard. Swackhammer, 493 F.3d at The current standard for an age-discrimination claim to survive summary judgment does not necessarily require a plaintiff to provide any evidence
19 that the real reason for his termination was age-related. Hare v. Denver Merch. Mart, Inc., 255 Fed. Appx. 298, 305 (10th Cir. 2008) (unpub.). This is not to say that summary judgment may never be awarded in a case where the evidence is sufficient to establish a prima facie case and the falsity of the employer s articulated reason. The Supreme Court indicated in Reeves that under certain circumstances where, for example, the record conclusively revealed some other, nondiscriminatory reason for the employer s decision, or the plaintiff only created a weak issue of fact as to whether the employer s reason was untrue and there was abundant and uncontroverted independent evidence that no discrimination had occurred summary judgment would be appropriate despite evidence sufficient to establish both the plaintiff s prima facie case and the falsity of the employer s reason. Reeves, 530 U.S. at 148 (citations omitted) (emphasis added). However, the situations in which these exceptions to the general rule apply are rare, and not present in the instant matter. See id. at (Ginsburg, J., concurring) (stating that it is uncommon and atypical for it to be conclusively demonstrated by evidence that the district court is required to credit on a motion... that discrimination could not have been the defendant s true motivation ) (emphasis added)
20 This Court has noted that the exceptions described in Reeves impose a heavy evidentiary burden on employers in showing an alternative source for the discrepancies in their reasons. Hare, 255 Fed. Appx. at 305. In the absence of abundant and uncontroverted evidence that no discrimination occurred, a plaintiff s showing of inconsistencies in the defendant s reasons for discharging him are sufficient to survive summary judgment. Id. at 306 (citation omitted); see also Reeves, 530 U.S. at 148 (same); Maughan v. Alaska Airlines, Inc., 281 Fed. Appx. 803, (10th Cir. 2008) (unpub.) ( even if [the plaintiff] has created only a weak issue of fact as to whether the employer s reason was untrue, [the defendant] has not presented the corollary abundant and uncontroverted independent evidence that no discrimination has occurred, that would entitle it to judgment as a matter of law ) (quoting in part Reeves, 530 U.S. at 148). The rare conditions necessary to establish an exception from the Reeves rule are not present in the instant matter. There is no evidence, and there is none, that conclusively reveals some other, nondiscriminatory reason for the District s decision to demote Jones. See Apx Further, even if the evidence of the falsity of the District s explanation could properly be characterized as weak, there is not also the requisite abundant, uncontroverted, independent evidence that no discrimination had occurred
21 that would make summary judgment for the District appropriate and, again, the district court made no such ruling. See Apx The district court s treatment of the District s motion for summary judgment presents a situation strikingly similar to that condemned in Reeves. In Reeves, the Supreme Court addressed a Court of Appeals decision in a case where the evidence was sufficient to establish both a prima facie case of age discrimination and that the employer s proffered reason for its action was unworthy of belief. Reeves, 530 U.S. at The Court of Appeals held that this showing, standing alone, was insufficient to support a verdict in the plaintiff s favor, adding that the court must, as an essential final step, determine whether [the plaintiff] presented sufficient evidence that his age motivated [respondent s] employment decision. Id. at 146 (second alteration in original) (quoting Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc., 197 F.3d 688, 693 (5th Cir. 1999)). As discussed above, the Supreme Court completely rejected this final step, or pretext-plus, approach. In this case, the district court recognized that there was sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to credit Jones prima facie case and reject the District s proffered reason for the demotion as false. Apx Notwithstanding the holding in Reeves that the district court s inquiry should have been at an end and the District s motion for summary judgment
22 should have been denied, the district court took an additional, final step of assessing the strength of the overall evidence of age discrimination to determine whether summary judgment was appropriate. In making this additional final step assessment that Reeves expressly rejected, the district court concluded that particularly fatal to Plaintiff s case is the lack of evidence from which a reasonable jury could find discrimination. Apx The district court, misreading Reeves, stated that [t]his lack of evidence places Plaintiff s case squarely within the contours of the Reeves exception. Apx Accordingly, the district court erred in granting the District s motion for summary judgment on the basis of what was essentially a pretext plus analysis. CONCLUSION For the aforementioned reasons, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court reverse the district court s grant of summary judgment to the
23 District, and remand the case for further proceedings. Respectfully submitted, JAMES L. LEE Deputy General Counsel CAROLYN L. WHEELER Acting Associate General Counsel VINCENT BLACKWOOD Assistant General counsel JAMES M. TUCKER Attorney EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of General Counsel 131 M St. NE, Rm. 5NW10P Washington, D.C (202) James.Tucker@EEOC.gov
24 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE I hereby certify that this brief complies with the type-volume requirements set forth in Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 29(d) and 32(a)(7)(B). This brief contains 3,840 words, from the Statement of Interest through the Conclusion, as determined by the Microsoft Word 2003 word processing program, with 14-point proportionally spaced type for text and 14-point proportionally spaced type for footnotes. JAMES M. TUCKER Attorney EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of General Counsel 131 M St. NE, Rm. 5NW10P Washington, D.C (202) James.Tucker@EEOC.gov
25 CERTIFICATE OF DIGITAL AND PHYSICAL SERVICE I hereby certify that on October 23, 2009, this document was electronically served on the counsel listed below via the Court s ECF Notice of Docket Activity system at their electronic addresses of record: Scott F. Brockman scott@wardglasslaw.com Laura L. Holmes lholmes@cfel.com Heather N. Hendricks hhendricks@cfel.com I further certify that all required privacy redactions (in this document, none) have been made to this document, that this ECF submission is an exact copy of the brief filed in hard copy with the Court, and that this digital submission has been scanned for viruses with the most recent version of a commercial virus scanning program, Symantec AntiVirus Corporate Edition, version , updated October 22, 2009, and, according to that program, is free of viruses. I further certify that on this same date, one original and seven additional hard copies of the foregoing brief were submitted to the Clerk of Court, United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, Byron White U.S. Courthouse, 1823 Stout St., Denver, CO JAMES M. TUCKER Attorney EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of General Counsel 131 M St. NE, Rm. 5NW10P Washington, D.C (202) James.Tucker@EEOC.gov
PUBLISH UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT
PUBLISH UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit August 24, 2010 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court JUDY F. JONES, v. Plaintiff Appellant, OKLAHOMA
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Madrid v. Legend Senior Living LLC Doc. 44 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA KAMA MADRID, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) -vs- ) Case No. CIV-11-488-R ) LEGEND SENIOR LIVING,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. Kauffman, J. April 18, 2008
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA EVELYN THOMAS v. COMMUNITY COLLEGE OF PHILADELPHIA CIVIL ACTION NO. 06-5372 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Kauffman, J. April 18, 2008
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Jerry Keeler felt that his employer, ARAMARK, didn t appreciate his
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit August 21, 2013 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court TENTH CIRCUIT QUINCEY GERALD KEELER, a/k/a Jerry, v. Plaintiff-Appellant,
More informationCase 1:08-cv-00284-CB-M Document 29 Filed 06/15/09 Page 1 of 9
Case 1:08-cv-00284-CB-M Document 29 Filed 06/15/09 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION CHRISTOPHER WILLIAMSON, ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) CIVIL
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Lorrie Logsdon sued her employer, Turbines, Inc.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit October 20, 2010 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court LORRIE LOGSDON, Plaintiff Appellant, v. TURBINES,
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 09-3007 Kathy D. Jones, * * Plaintiff - Appellee, * * On Appeal from the United v. * States District Court for the * District of South Dakota.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 14-13197. D.C. Docket No. 9:13-cv-80535-DMM
Case: 14-13197 Date Filed: 12/18/2015 Page: 1 of 13 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 14-13197 D.C. Docket No. 9:13-cv-80535-DMM ROBERT LIEBMAN, versus METROPOLITAN
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT VIVIAN R. HARRIS, : Plaintiff, : : 3:08-cv-909 (CFD) v. : : LONG HILL TREE AND LAWN CARE : SERVICE, INC., : Defendant. : RULING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY
More informationTicket Seller Position - An Employment Discrimination Lawsuit
THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 03-1882 NOT PRECEDENTIAL PATTY JO DORSEY, Executors of the Estate of Philip W. Dorsey III; DANIEL H. BOOKER; REDMOND JOHNSON, JR.; PHILIP S.
More informationNOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 13a0927n.06. No. 13-5221 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 13a0927n.06 No. 13-5221 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT Gaylus Bailey, v. Plaintiff-Appellant, Real Time Staffing Services, Inc., dba Select
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Cynthia Montoya appeals the district court s decision granting summary
CYNTHIA MONTOYA, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit January 25, 2016 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court Plaintiff - Appellant, v.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Case: 09-60765 Document: 00511297029 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/17/2010 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit F I L E D November 17, 2010
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before HARTZ, ANDERSON, and BALDOCK, Circuit Judges.
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit February 9, 2012 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT SHARON K. BOESE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FORT
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT FILED U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Tenth Circuit May 15, 2008 Barbara A. Schermerhorn Clerk IN RE CHRISTOPHER
More informationThe N.C. State Bar v. Wood NO. COA10-463. (Filed 1 February 2011) 1. Attorneys disciplinary action convicted of criminal offense
The N.C. State Bar v. Wood NO. COA10-463 (Filed 1 February 2011) 1. Attorneys disciplinary action convicted of criminal offense The North Carolina State Bar Disciplinary Hearing Commission did not err
More information2:09-cv-14271-LPZ-PJK Doc # 13 Filed 06/24/10 Pg 1 of 6 Pg ID 53 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
2:09-cv-14271-LPZ-PJK Doc # 13 Filed 06/24/10 Pg 1 of 6 Pg ID 53 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION v. Plaintiff, CASE NO. 09-14271 HON.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. Kauffman, J. December 16, 2008
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA DAVID B. HADLEY CIVIL ACTION v. NO. 08-1440 PFIZER INC. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Kauffman, J. December 16, 2008 Plaintiff David
More informationNOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 16a0059n.06. No. 15-5011 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 16a0059n.06 No. 15-5011 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ELLEY A. LOPREATO, APRN, RN; SUSAN M. TAYLOR, RN v. Plaintiffs-Appellants, SELECT
More informationArgued May 24, 1993. Decided June 30, 1993. Justice GREEN delivered the opinion of the court:
Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District. Lillie M. DAVIS, Petitioner, v. The HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION and Illinois State University, Respondents. No. 4-92-0546. Argued May 24, 1993. Decided June 30,
More informationPatricia Clarey, President; Richard Costigan, and Lauri Shanahan, DECISION. This case is before the State Personnel Board (SPB or the Board) after the
MICHAEL BAYLISS v. SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY Appeal from Dismissal BOARD DECISION AND ORDER (Precedential) No. 13-02 October 24, 2013 APPEARANCES: Hubert Lloyd, Labor Relations Representative, CSUEU,
More information2015 IL App (5th) 140227-U NO. 5-14-0227 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIFTH DISTRICT
NOTICE Decision filed 10/15/15. The text of this decision may be changed or corrected prior to the filing of a Petition for Rehearing or the disposition of the same. 2015 IL App (5th 140227-U NO. 5-14-0227
More informationDec. 28, 1984. MILLS, Justice: Issue: Employment discrimination because of race.
Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District. K MART CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, State of Illinois and Vickie Crider, Defendants- Appellants. No. 4-84-0236. Dec. 28, 1984.
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS. No. 10-CV-769. Appeal from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia (CAC2807-05)
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2003 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. No. 93-1789. George S. ROBERTSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. No. 93-1789. George S. ROBERTSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BELL HELICOPTER TEXTRON, INC., Defendant-Appellee. Sept. 26, 1994. Appeal from the United States
More information2.21 THE NEW JERSEY LAW AGAINST DISCRIMINATION ( NJLAD ) (N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 et seq.) INTRODUCTORY NOTE TO THE COURT (Approved 5/03)
CHARGE 2.21 Page 1 of 13 2.21 THE NEW JERSEY LAW AGAINST DISCRIMINATION ( NJLAD ) (N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 et seq.) INTRODUCTORY NOTE TO THE COURT (Approved 5/03) The model employment discrimination charges that
More informationNo. 1-15-0941 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
2015 IL App (1st) 150941-U SIXTH DIVISION December 18, 2015 No. 1-15-0941 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances
More informationLarry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding
Case: 11-55379 06/ 26/ 2012 ID: 8228066 DktEntry: 25-1 Page: 1 of 5 FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUN 26 2012 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U. S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
More informationC. Disparate Treatment Theory of Discrimination. Plaintiff XXXX is pursuing his claim of racial discrimination by UPS on the theory of disparate
C. Disparate Treatment Theory of Discrimination. Plaintiff XXXX is pursuing his claim of racial discrimination by UPS on the theory of disparate treatment, as well as disparate impact. Discriminatory or
More informationEEO 101 The Basic Theories of Employment Discrimination
EEO 101 The Basic Theories of Employment Discrimination An overview of the anti-discrimination statutes enforced by the EEOC An introduction to the theories under which claims of discrimination can be
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. August Term, 2014. Docket No. 14-1034-cv
--cv 0 0 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 0 (Submitted: March, 0 Decided: October, 0) Docket No. --cv -----------------------------------------------------------X CATHARINE
More informationNOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 10a0063n.06. No. 09-1145 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 10a0063n.06 No. 09-1145 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT SUSAN CUTCHER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KMART CORPORATION, a Michigan corporation,
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2013-CA-01200-COA
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2013-CA-01200-COA HARVEY HALEY APPELLANT v. ANNA JURGENSON, AGELESS REMEDIES FRANCHISING, LLC, AGELESS REMEDIES MEDICAL SKINCARE AND APOTHECARY AND
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION. v. CIVIL ACTION NO. H-08-0146 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Piper-Buckmire v. MedVance Institute Doc. 22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION ARLENE PIPER-BUCKMIRE, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. H-08-0146 MEDVANCE
More informationDEPARTMENTAL APPEALS BOARD
Department of Health and Human Services DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS BOARD Appellate Division In the Case of: The Physicians Hospital in Anadarko, Petitioner, - v. - Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. DATE:
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. Case Nos. 06-2262 and 06-2384 CON-WAY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC. Appellant No.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT Case Nos. 06-2262 and 06-2384 NOT PRECEDENTIAL CON-WAY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC., Appellant No. 06-2262 v. REGSCAN, INC. CON-WAY TRANSPORTATION
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS. No. 01-CV-810. Appeal from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia (CA-7519-00)
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT MARVIN HARRIS, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 4D13-4741 [May 27, 2015] Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial
More informationNOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT ALFREDO MEJIA, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D13-2248 ) CITIZENS
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Kauffman, J. January 11, 2007
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MAJID AKARIMALI v. NORTHWESTERN HUMAN SERVICES CIVIL ACTION NO. 05-1009 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Kauffman, J. January 11, 2007 Plaintiff
More informationSUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI en banc
SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI en banc KENNETH SUNDERMEYER, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR ELVA ELIZABETH SUNDERMEYER, DECEASED, Appellant, v. SC89318 SSM REGIONAL HEALTH SERVICES D/B/A VILLA
More informationEmployee Relations. Howard S. Lavin and Elizabeth E. DiMichele
VOL. 34, NO. 4 SPRING 2009 Employee Relations L A W J O U R N A L Split Circuits Does Charging Party s Receipt of a Right-to-Sue Letter and Commencement of a Lawsuit Divest the EEOC of its Investigative
More information4:13-cv-10877-MAG-LJM Doc # 16 Filed 07/03/13 Pg 1 of 7 Pg ID 126 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
4:13-cv-10877-MAG-LJM Doc # 16 Filed 07/03/13 Pg 1 of 7 Pg ID 126 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION MICHAEL BUSSARD, v. Plaintiff, SHERMETA, ADAMS AND VON ALLMEN,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, 8:03CV165 Plaintiff, v. WOODMEN OF THE WORLD LIFE INSURANCE SOCIETY and/or OMAHA WOODMEN LIFE INSURANCE
More informationDEFENDANT ATTORNEY GENERAL S REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF HIS MOTION TO DISMISS
Case :0-cv-00-EHC Document Filed 0/0/0 Page of 0 PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General DANIEL KNAUSS United States Attorney THEODORE C. HIRT Assistant Branch Director Civil Division, Federal Programs
More informationHow To Decide If A Shipyard Can Pay For A Boatyard
Case 2:08-cv-01700-NJB-KWR Document 641 Filed 02/02/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ATEL MARITIME INVESTORS, LP, et al. CIVIL ACTION VERSUS CASE NO. 08-1700 SEA
More informationCase 1:07-cv-01227 Document 37 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
Case 1:07-cv-01227 Document 37 Filed 05/23/2007 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION JACK and RENEE BEAM, Plaintiffs, No. 07 CV 1227 v.
More information2015 IL App (1st) 141985-U. No. 1-14-1985 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
2015 IL App (1st) 141985-U No. 1-14-1985 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).
More informationCriminal Lawyer Tips For Successfully Running Appeals
TIPS FOR HANDLING FEDERAL CRIMINAL APPEALS By Henry J. Bemporad Deputy Federal Public Defender Western District of Texas Like any field of law, criminal appellate practice is an inexact science. No one
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No. 10-3272. In re: JOHN W. HOWARD, Debtor. ROBERT O. LAMPL, Appellant
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 10-3272 In re: JOHN W. HOWARD, Debtor NOT PRECEDENTIAL ROBERT O. LAMPL, Appellant VANASKIE, Circuit Judge. On Appeal from the United States District
More informationv. Civil Action No. 10-865-LPS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE GIAN BIOLOGICS, LLC, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 10-865-LPS BIOMET INC. and BIOMET BIOLOGICS, LLC, Defendants. MEMORANDUM ORDER At Wilmington
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO. Docket No. 39822 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No. 39822 JEFFRY J. BLACK, v. Plaintiff-Appellant, IDAHO STATE POLICE, an executive department of the STATE OF IDAHO; and COLONEL G. JERRY RUSSELL, Director
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DONALD GALLOWAY, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 91-0644 (JHG SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA and THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Defendants.
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF GUAM
DISTRICT COURT OF GUAM UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1-0000 1 RODNEY M. KIDD, vs. ORDER AND DECISION RE MOTION FOR JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL UNDER RULE (c) 1 Defendant. 1 1 1 0 1 Before
More informationPUBLISH UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT
Filed 9/25/96 PUBLISH UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. No. 95-3409 GERALD T. CECIL, Defendant-Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT
More informationFOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE # 15 FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE # 15 FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA The Opinions handed down on the 26th day of February, 2008, are as follows: PER CURIAM: 2007-CC-1091 FREY PLUMBING
More informationCase 1:07-cv-00514-GJQ Document 58 Filed 01/02/2008 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Case 1:07-cv-00514-GJQ Document 58 Filed 01/02/2008 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION WALTER E. HARRIS v. Plaintiff, Case No. 1:07-CV-514 HON.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit F I L E D November 19, 2009 No. 09-20049 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk DEALER COMPUTER SERVICES
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
FIDELITY & GUARANTY LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit Plaintiff - Appellee, FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT February 18, 2015 Elisabeth A.
More informationPUBLISH UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT. Plaintiff-Appellee, v. No. 10-4068 CURTIS CORDERY,
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit August 30, 2011 PUBLISH Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 11-15206. D. C. Docket No. 1:10-cv-23114-JLK. versus
ILIANA RODRIGUEZ, Case: 11-15206 Date Filed: 12/03/2012 Page: 1 of 20 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 11-15206 D. C. Docket No. 1:10-cv-23114-JLK versus UNIVERSITY OF
More informationLABOR AND EMPLOYMENT LAW UPDATE FOR MAY 2016 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES CONFERENCE. Timothy L. Davis. Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP www.bwslaw.
LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT LAW UPDATE FOR MAY 2016 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES CONFERENCE Timothy L. Davis Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP www.bwslaw.com OVERVIEW FOR 2016 UPDATE Labor Law Court Decisions Employment
More informationCourt of Appeals of Ohio
[Cite as Rutledge v. Ohio Dept. of Ins., 2006-Ohio-5013.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 87372 DARWIN C. RUTLEDGE PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT
More informationEmployment - Federal Employers Liability Act. EMPLOYMENT FEDERAL RAILWAY SAFETY ACT. LEGAL OVERVIEW (GENERAL)
. EMPLOYMENT FEDERAL RAILWAY SAFETY ACT. LEGAL OVERVIEW (GENERAL) The Federal Railway Safety Act, 49 U.S.C. 20101 et seq., (the FRSA ) was enacted in 1970 to promote safety in every area of railroad operations
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DONALD LYLE STRATTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. JULIE BUCK, in her individual capacity; DALE BROWN, in his individual capacity; JOHN DOE,
More informationReports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the
****************************************************** The officially released date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal
More informationPRESIDING JUSTICE WOLFSON delivered the opinion of the. Petitioner C.R.M. filed a charge of discrimination with the
SECOND DIVISION April 17, 2007 No. 1-06-2447 IN THE MATTER OF: ) Appeal from an order C.R.M., ) of the Chief Legal ) Counsel of the Petitioner-Appellant, ) Illinois Department ) of Human Rights. v. ) )
More informationCase 1:12-cv-11605-RWZ Document 71 Filed 09/08/14 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS CIVIL ACTION NO.
Case 1:12-cv-11605-RWZ Document 71 Filed 09/08/14 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS CIVIL ACTION NO. 12-11605-RWZ ELIZABETH TYREE v. ANTHONY FOXX, 1 Secretary, U.S. Department
More informationDecember 16, 2010 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit December 16, 2010 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT DOUG HAMBELTON, Plaintiff Appellee, v. CANAL
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:11-cv-02026-SCJ Document 118 Filed 12/10/12 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION EDWARD BRANDON NOE, Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION No. 1:11-cv-02026-SCJ
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Senior Judge Richard P. Matsch
Case 1:12-cv-02555-RPM Document 37 Filed 11/22/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 6 Civil Action No. 12-cv-02555-RPM STEPHEN BERKEN, v. Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
More informationUNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No. 10-4381
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-4381 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ERIC SMITH, a/k/a Capone, a/k/a Pone, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before KELLY, ANDERSON, and TYMKOVICH, Circuit Judges.
FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit WILLIAM MOSHER; LYNN MOSHER, Plaintiffs - Appellants, FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT November 19, 2014 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk
More informationNational Labor Relations Board Rules That Mandatory Arbitration Clause Violates The National Labor Relations Act
National Labor Relations Board Rules That Mandatory Arbitration Clause Violates The National Labor Relations Act October 16, 2006 In a recent decision potentially affecting all companies that use mandatory
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, vs. JEREMY JOHNSON, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER 2:11-CR-501 DN Chief District
More informationNOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 13a0429n.06. No. 12-4217 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 13a0429n.06 No. 12-4217 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT CRYSTAL SARVAK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. URBAN RETAIL PROPERTIES, LLC, Defendant-Appellee.
More informationCase 3:09-cv-00080-TMB Document 71 Filed 03/15/2010 Page 1 of 11
Case 3:09-cv-00080-TMB Document 71 Filed 03/15/2010 Page 1 of 11 KAREN L. LOEFFLER United States Attorney RICHARD L. POMEROY Assistant U.S. Attorney Federal Building & U.S. Courthouse 222 West Seventh
More informationTORT AND INSURANCE LAW REPORTER. Informal Discovery Interviews Between Defense Attorneys and Plaintiff's Treating Physicians
This article originally appeared in The Colorado Lawyer, Vol. 25, No. 26, June 1996. by Jeffrey R. Pilkington TORT AND INSURANCE LAW REPORTER Informal Discovery Interviews Between Defense Attorneys and
More information8:09-cv-00341-LSC-FG3 Doc # 276 Filed: 07/19/13 Page 1 of 5 - Page ID # 3979 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
8:09-cv-00341-LSC-FG3 Doc # 276 Filed: 07/19/13 Page 1 of 5 - Page ID # 3979 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA MICHAEL S. ARGENYI, Plaintiff, v. CREIGHTON UNIVERSITY, Defendant.
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals
In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 13 2018 PATRICIA BANKS, Plaintiff Appellant, v. CHICAGO BOARD OF EDUCATION and FLORENCE GONZALES, Defendants Appellees. Appeal from the
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit DEC 8 2004 PATRICK FISHER Clerk RICHARD E. MYERS; SARAH MYERS, v. Plaintiffs-Appellants, COUNTRY
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2002-KA-01124-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2002-KA-01124-COA JIMMY FORD APPELLANT v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE DATE OF TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT: 5/10/2002 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. MARCUS D. GORDON
More informationAttorneys for Plaintiff One Lincoln Center Syracuse, New York 13202 MEMORANDUM-DECISION, FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ----------------------------------------------------------- IN RE: MICHAEL A. LEMON CASE NO. 99-60083 LYNN M. LEMON Chapter 13 Debtors -----------------------------------------------------------
More informationCase 1:06-cv-00168-TBR-ERG Document 162 Filed 05/11/10 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 4549
Case 1:06-cv-00168-TBR-ERG Document 162 Filed 05/11/10 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 4549 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY BOWLING GREEN DIVISION CASE NO. 1:06-CV-168 MARK THOMPSON PLAINTIFF
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA COLUMBUS DIVISION ORDER
Case 4:02-cv-00066-HL Document 136 Filed 02/10/09 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA COLUMBUS DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : ex rel. GLENN F. NICHOLS
More informationCase 1:07-cv-00389-MJW-BNB Document 51 Filed 08/21/2008 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:07-cv-00389-MJW-BNB Document 51 Filed 08/21/2008 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 07-cv-00389-MJW-BNB ERNA GANSER, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT
More informationIN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA James Reichert, : Petitioner : : v. : No. 42 C.D. 2013 : Argued: October 10, 2013 Workers' Compensation Appeal : Board (Dollar Tree Stores/Dollar : Express and
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA ORDER
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA J&K BODY SHOP, INC., ET AL., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) vs. ) NO. CIV-11-0077-HE ) ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE CO., ) ET AL., ) ) Defendants.
More informationCase 4:04-cv-03526 Document 84 Filed in TXSD on 02/02/06 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Case 4:04-cv-03526 Document 84 Filed in TXSD on 02/02/06 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION ALEXANDER WARDLAW, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. H-04-3526
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MATTHEW PRICHARD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY; IBM LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN, Defendants-Appellees.
More informationProcedure, Evidence & Jurisdiction in EEOC Lawsuits
ALI-ABA Course of Study Evidence Issues and Jury Instructions in Employment Cases Cosponsored by Georgetown CLE February 9-10, 2006 Washington, D.C. Procedure, Evidence & Jurisdiction in EEOC Lawsuits
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA CENTRAL DIVISION. EARL A. POWELL, In the name of THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Case 4:05-cv-00008-JAJ-RAW Document 80 Filed 11/21/2007 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA CENTRAL DIVISION EARL A. POWELL, In the name of THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
More informationUNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No. 14-2106. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-2106 CHARLES A. BROWN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant - Appellee.
More informationSupreme Court Decision Affirming Judicial Right to Review EEOC Actions
Supreme Court Decision Affirming Judicial Right to Review EEOC Actions The Supreme Court Holds That EEOC s Conciliation Efforts Are Subject to Judicial Review, Albeit Narrow SUMMARY A unanimous Supreme
More informationCase 2:11-cv-02714-JAR Document 247 Filed 03/28/14 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
Case 2:11-cv-02714-JAR Document 247 Filed 03/28/14 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS ) BOARDWALK APARTMENTS, L.C., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. 11-2714-JAR-KMH
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION. v. Case No: 2:13-cv-728-FtM-29DNF OPINION AND ORDER
ROBERT KOSSOWSKI, an individual, Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION v. Case No: 2:13-cv-728-FtM-29DNF THE CITY OF NAPLES, a municipal corporation of
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA BRANDI NICOLE COMBEST ) JACKSON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-08-384-SPS ) FARMERS NEW WORLD ) LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, )
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division
PUBLISHED UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division IN RE: WILLIAM G. DADE ) Case No. 00-32487 ANN E. DADE ) Chapter 7 Debtors. ) ) ) DEBORAH R. JOHNSON ) Adversary
More informationSUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA MARICOPA COUNTY LC2014-000424-001 DT 01/22/2015 THE HON. CRANE MCCLENNEN HIGHER COURT RULING / REMAND
Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court *** Filed *** 01/26/2015 8:00 AM THE HON. CRANE MCCLENNEN STATE OF ARIZONA CLERK OF THE COURT J. Eaton Deputy GARY L SHUPE v. MONICA RENEE JONES (001) JEAN JACQUES CABOU
More information