By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. and Alex W. Karasik
Seyfarth Synopsis: In EEOC v. Konos, Inc., Case No. 1:20-CV-973 (W.D. Mich. June 3, 2021), the EEOC filed a lawsuit on behalf of a claimant against her employer, alleging it subjected to her to a hostile work environment and retaliation after she was sent home
By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. and Jennifer A. Riley
Seyfarth Synopsis: In the first ruling in response to the slew of room and board refund class actions filed in the wake of COVID-19, on July 29, 2020, in Rosenkrantz v. Arizona Board of Regents, No. 2:20-CV-01203 (D. Ariz.), Judge John Tuchi of the U.S.
By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. and Lauren E. Becker
Seyfarth Synopsis: The U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey recently issued a ruling with respect to Defendants’ “compelling” exhaustion argument that Plaintiffs failed to exhaust administrative remedies with respect to their disparate treatment and disparate impact theories of Title VII claims relied on
By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. and Alex W. Karasik
Seyfarth Synopsis: A federal district court in Maryland recently denied in part an employer’s motion to dismiss a race discrimination action brought on behalf of African-born security guards by the EEOC, and instead granted the EEOC’s motion to stay so that the Commission could amend its
By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. and Alex W. Karasik
Seyfarth Synopsis: After a federal district court dismissed the EEOC’s unlawful-interference claim against a private college that had sued a former employee for allegedly breaching a settlement agreement by filing an EEOC charge, the Tenth Circuit reversed the dismissal of the EEOC’s unlawful-interference claim, citing
By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. and Reanne Swafford-Harris
Seyfarth Synopsis: Relief sought in age discrimination litigation is limited to the specific remedies described in the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”).
In a ruling on April 26, 2016, in K.H., et al., v. Secretary of The Department of Homeland Security, Case No. 15-CV-02740 (N.D.
By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. and Alex W. Karasik
Anti-discrimination laws command that “thou shall not retaliate…” The recent ruling in EEOC v. Day & Zimmerman NPS, Inc., Case No. 15-CV-01416 (D. Conn Apr. 12, 2016), is a case study in how employers can be taken to task for allegedly retaliating against workers who
By Gerald L. Maatman Jr. and Christina M. Janice
In an order recently issued in James Robinson III, et al. v. General Motors Company, et al., Case No. 15-CV-158-Y (N.D. Tex. Oct. 21, 2015), Judge Terry R. Means of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas denied class certification to two
By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. and Kathryn “Chris” Palamountain
A recent Texas Court of Appeals case involving claims of human trafficking of workers recruited in the Philippines and brought to work in Texas provides insight into how principles of international comity may be applied in Texas state courts in the class action context. This ruling
On September 22, 2014, in EEOC v. Vicksburg Healthcare LLC, et al., Case No. 3:13-CV-895 (S.D. Miss. Sept. 22, 2014), Judge Keith Starrett the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi granted defendant’s motion to dismiss an EEOC lawsuit for lack of personal jurisdiction and insufficient service
