|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Report Link U.S. Supreme Court Issues Employer-Friendly ADEA Ruling.Ogletree Deakins - August 13, 2009 In a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that an employee alleging a disparate treatment claim under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) must prove that age was the "but for" cause of the challenged adverse employment action. Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the majority, ruled that even where the employee has produced evidence that age was one motivating factor in that decision the burden of persuasion does not shift to the employer to show that it would have taken the action without regard to age. Report Link Court Withdraws Controversial Age Bias Decision (pdf).Ogletree Deakins - June 19, 2006 Selection criteria in RIF. Report Link Supreme Court Expands Scope of Age Discrimination Law.Littler Mendelson, P.C. - April 08, 2005 On March 30, 2005, in a decision that will change the landscape of age discrimination litigation, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Smith v. City of Jackson that workers age 40 and older may prove discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) using a disparate impact theory. Report Link High Court Broadens Age Bias Claims (pdf).Ogletree Deakins - April 05, 2005 In a very divided 5-3 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court held this morning that employees may bring
so-called “disparate impact” claims under the federal statute prohibiting age discrimination. Report Link Supreme Court Allows Disparate Impact Claims Under ADEA (pdf).Vedder Price - April 01, 2005 In a surprise ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court decided on March 30, 2005 that a claimant may establish liability under
the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) even if there is no intent to discriminate. Smith v. City
of Jackson, Mississippi, No, 03-1160. Report Link Claims of Age Discrimination Based on Disparate Impact Under the ADEA Can Be Made by Older Workers.Jackson Lewis LLP - March 31, 2005 In a decision of great significance, the U. S. Supreme Court has ruled that an individual protected by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act can sue an employer if a policy, practice or other employment action has had a disparate impact because of that individual's age. Report Link Supreme Court Again Agrees To Consider Viability of Disparate Impact Claims under the ADEA.Jackson Lewis LLP - July 20, 2004 On March 29, 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court once again agreed to consider whether disparate impact claims may be brought under the ADEA.
|
ArticlesFound: 7 ArticlesNO SUBTOPICSEmployment Law Seminars
Top Tips to Protect Your Workplace From Violence
Webinar
November 10, 2009 HR Learning Center LLCWorkplace Change in the Obama EraColumbus
November 10, 2009 Littler2009 Employment Practices ConferenceUniversal City
November 10, 2009 Ballard RosenbergFall Employment Law Mini-SeriesTysons Corner
November 10, 2009 LittlerBusiness Continuity During the H1N1 OutbreakWebinar
November 10, 2009 Littler"Action Steps for Upcoming Open Enrollment" Free E-BriefingWebinar
November 10, 2009 Ford & HarrisonLabor and Employment Law SeminarLos Angeles
November 11, 2009 OgletreeHR Network 2009 | RestonReston
November 12, 2009 CooleyThe Labor & Employment Compliance Costs of Federal ContractingWebinar
November 12, 2009 LittlerCalifornia Legally Required Sexual Harassment Training: It's Never Too Late to ComplyLa Jolla
November 12, 2009 Fisher & Phillips |
|
| ||
|
Terms of Use
|
Privacy
|
Advertising
|
About
|
Contact
|
For Law Firms
|
Partners
Copyright © 2009 elinfonet.com, llc.
The use of this site, and the terms and conditions for our providing information, is governed by our Terms of Use, including the disclaimers contained therein. By using this site, you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Use and that you accept and will be bound by the terms thereof.
This site is designed for lawyers concentrating in employment law and human resource professionals who specialize in employee relations. As more fully set forth in the terms of use, the information provided on or through this site is for general information purposes; it is not a determination of your legal rights, nor your responsibilities under the law. None of the information contained on this site is, or should be construed as, legal advice. The information should not be relied upon for legal advice. We are not engaged in the practice of law and no attorney-client relationship is being created. Any information communicated to any lawyer via this site does not have the confidentiality protection of the attorney/client privilege. If you are seeking legal advice, find a qualified lawyer in your area. If you need help finding a lawyer, call your local, county or state bar association. All logos and trademarks on this site are property of their respective owners. | ||
Federal Article Feeds