Total Articles: 20
Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP • October 09, 2015
One of the marks of a good trial lawyer is knowing when to sit down and shut up.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • August 11, 2015
The combination of a recent unfavorable Supreme Court decision along with dramatically increased federal funding for fair housing enforcement could spell bad news. Businesses that operate in the housing industry and those businesses that provide financing and insurance coverage for the industry should be prepared for a new wave of legal challenges on the horizon.
Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP • June 26, 2015
As you know, I strongly disapprove of use of the “N” word in the workplace. I don’t think African-Americans should say it, and I really, really don’t think people who aren’t African-American should use it.
Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP • March 23, 2015
Well, I got to Starbucks this morning, and Xander told me I didn’t have to worry about that #RaceTogether stuff any more.
Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP • March 20, 2015
I start my new job as a Starbucks barista tomorrow. I am super-excited!!!!! I just hope I can handle the fast pace!
Goldberg Segalla LLP • February 23, 2015
On Tuesday, February 17, 2015, the Second Circuit upheld Judge Margo K. Brodie’s grant of summary judgment to Owens and Minor Distribution, Inc. (O&M) in a race and national origin discrimination and retaliation case. The Second Circuit agreed with the Eastern District of New York’s decision that O&M, a distributor of medical and surgical supplies, presented a legitimate non-discriminatory and non-retaliatory reason for terminating Mr. Joseph. In its well-reasoned decision, the district court provided a helpful reminder in guiding employers through the employment cycle of an employee with performance difficulties.
Goldberg Segalla LLP • June 04, 2014
Despite the heightened scrutiny given to reverse racial discrimination claims, it is difficult but not impossible to prevail under the right circumstances.
Ogletree Deakins • May 05, 2014
Growing up in an affluent, mostly white suburb of Detroit, I never really embraced my diversity. I knew that I was different from my schoolmates and friends, but I didn’t think much about it. Sure, I took Chinese lessons every week in Canada and had a cool mom who came in every year for show-and-tell to teach my elementary school class about Chinese traditions. Of course, I stood with far fewer classmates during a middle school exercise in which we were asked to identify different races and stand with students of similar races. And yes, I found it annoying to be constantly mistaken for my best friend (who is also Asian) or assumed to be her sister. Still, I couldn’t deny that when I was invited to participate in a “People of Color Conference” in high school, a part of me agreed with my friends, who insisted, “But you’re not a person of color—You’re Asian.” I wouldn’t say that I resisted the idea that I belonged to a minority group; I just didn’t think that being Asian really mattered that much.
Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP • November 01, 2013
One of my favorite categories on Twitter is #firstworldproblems. As the name implies, it's a bunch of tweets about problems that don't amount to anything but that drive us crazy in our ridiculously affluent, spoiled-rotten world.
Franczek Radelet P.C • August 26, 2013
Although most of the media attention surrounding Jackson v. Deen has focused on Paula Deen’s admission during a deposition that she used racial slurs, the underlying case presents an interesting legal question: Can a white employee bring a Title VII discrimination claim on the basis that she was forced to endure a discriminatory and hostile working environment? A federal court in Georgia says no.
Shaw Valenza LLP • August 19, 2013
42 U.S.C. Section 1983 allows public sector workers to challenge certain government employer action against public sector workers. The law permits state employees to challenge deprivations of due process or equal protection that amount to violations of the constitution. But to use Section 1983, the employee must demonstrate a property right or liberty interest that the government employer deprived. Many civil service workers are employed under conditions that virtually guarantee them a job that cannot end without sufficient cause. Section 1983 lawsuits involving employment actions often are predicated on that sort of employment relationship.
Ogletree Deakins • July 01, 2013
On June 20, 1963, what became the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was introduced as H.R. 7152, in the 1st Session of the 88th Congress. It was referred to the Judiciary Committee which was chaired by Rep. Emanual Celler (D-NY). He referred it to a sub-committee, which he also chaired.
Ogletree Deakins • June 12, 2013
On June 11, 1963, George Wallace made his famous "segregation forever" speech while standing in the door to block the integration of the University of Alabama. (Wonder what Coach Saban would think of that idea?). After President Kennedy nationalized the Alabama National Guard, Wallace stepped aside.
Ogletree Deakins • June 10, 2013
In the summer of 1963, the summer between the 7th and 8th grade for me, my main concern was playing first base for Tapp's Pony League baseball team. (It was Tapp's the furniture store, not the funeral home, although I doubt that many in the small town new, or for that matter cared.) In other parts of the country, there were much more significant matters as the civil rights movement which had been building since the mid-1950's was beginning yet another significant and violent summer.
Ogletree Deakins • December 23, 2011
Forecasting is an art not a science, and truth be known luck is probably the most single important factor if one gets it right, still I could not help but think back to one of my first posts of this year, 2011 --- the Year of the Non-minority? where I thought that we might see
Ogletree Deakins • July 26, 2010
The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that a nursing home’s policy of complying with patients’ wishes to be treated only by white health care workers can form the basis of a racially hostile work environment for non-white employees.
Ogletree Deakins • May 04, 2009
On April 22, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments regarding the internal clash between Title VII’s disparate impact and disparate treatment provisions. Ricci v. DeStefano, U.S., No. 07-1428 (oral argument 4/22/09). The case is based upon the city of New Haven’s decision not to certify the results of two 2003 firefighter promotional exams - one for captain, and one for lieutenant – when 14 of the top 15 scores were earned by white candidates. The district court dismissed a lawsuit filed in 2004 on behalf of 17 white and one Hispanic firefighters; that decision was upheld by the 2d U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The case was accepted for argument by the Supreme Court, primarily to address the issue of whether the city’s decision violated Title VII and/or the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.
Ogletree Deakins • June 25, 2008
A federal appellate court recently dismissed a lawsuit brought by an African-American manager who claimed that his discharge was racially motivated because he dated (and subsequently married) a white hourly employee. According to the court, the worker failed to establish a prima facie case of race discrimination, and even if he could, there was no evidence that the company's explanation for his discharge was a pretext for unlawful bias.
Ogletree Deakins • June 03, 2008
Healthcare entities continue to monitor federal court decisions related to the relationship between hospitals and credentialed physicians to determine whether hospital bylaws are being viewed by the courts as contracts with the doctors. Recently, however, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals side-stepped the “contract” issue while addressing a race discrimination claim brought by a doctor against a hospital. Instead, it analyzed the case under the typical burden shifting framework generally applicable in federal discrimination cases. Under that analysis, the physician failed to show that race was a motivating factor in the hospital’s decision to terminate his privileges there, and his case was dismissed.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • May 29, 2007
In February, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) launched its "E-RACE" (Eradicating Racism and Colorism from Employment) Initiative. The E-RACE Initiative is designed to improve the EEOC's efforts to free the workplace of race and color discrimination. The EEOC intends to identify issues, criteria and barriers that contribute to race and color discrimination, explore strategies to improve the administrative processing and litigation of race and color discrimination claims, and enhance public awareness of race and color discrimination in employment.