Thursday, April 6, 2017
- Seventh Circuit: In en banc decision, the court held that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is a form of sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
- Maine Legislature: LD 1239 would amend the Maine Human Rights Act to, in part, authorize the Maine Human Rights Commission to issue binding decisions and remedies if both parties agree; suspend an investigation if Complainant files an affidavit that she will seek a right-to-sue after 180 days; impose sanctions (including dismissal) for providing false information or violating nondisclosure agreement; dismiss or refuse to accept frivolous or repetitious complaints; and issue a right-to-sue letter at its discretion (not just upon request by Complainant) after 180 days
- Second Circuit: Without reversing prior Second Circuit precedent that Title VII does not prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, the court held that complaint plausibly alleged claim based on the gender stereotyping theory of sex discrimination articulated in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins
- Eighth Circuit: The court held that a “reasonable accommodation” under the Americans with Disabilities Act may include transfer to a position that the employer reasonably anticipates will become vacant in the fairly immediate future, although it is unavailable at the time the employee goes through the accommodation process
- Third Circuit: The court held that Fair Housing Act claims survives the death of a party
- Maine Legislature: LD 1222 would make several changes to the laws governing employment practices concerning substance abuse testing, including removing the “probable cause” standard and replacing it with an “impairment detection” standard required before the employer may conduct substance use testing
- Maine Legislature: LD 1240 would provide immunity under the Maine Tort Claims Act to health care practitioners who contract to provide free medical services to underserved populations of the state
- Maine Legislature: LD 1259 would amend the Maine Human Rights Act to provide that evidence of discrimination with respect to compensation includes an employer seeking information about a prospective employee’s prior wage history before an offer of employment, including all compensation, to the prospective employee has been made; and preventing employees from discussing or disclosing other employees’ wages
- Law Court: Oral arguments schedule for April 12th include Cum-16-312 (whether driver who waived plaintiff on to make turn in front of him negligently caused ensuing accident, and whether State of Maine has to provide underinsured motorist coverage to plaintiff); Cum-16-408 (whether defendant who did not carry the level of liability insurance required by its excess insurance carrier was underinsured for purposes of plaintiff’s claim against his own auto insurance); Cum-16-415 (whether judgment against real estate agent on misrepresentation claim had to be reduced by amount of settlement with prior homeowners pursuant to 14 M.R.S. § 163)
- Law Court: The court affirmed summary judgment for University of Maine System on negligence claim arising out of student’s slip-and-fall injury, finding that “good cause” did not exist for student’s failure to serve formal 180-day notice of claim where student offered no explanation for why she did not serve notice within the 63 days remaining of the notice period after University denied her informal claim
- Law Court: the court affirmed summary judgment for homeowner’s insurance company in reach-and-apply action to recover damages arising out of auto accident where the driver fit within “regular use” exclusion
- USDCT ME: Magistrate Judge recommended, in part, that the court disregard allegations in original complaint relied upon by defendant in its motion to dismiss, finding that an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint, and facts that are neither repeated nor otherwise incorporated into the amended complaint no longer bind the pleader; but otherwise recommended dismissal of equal protection claim
- US Supreme Court: The Court held that a district’s court’s decision to enforce or quash an EEOC subpoena should be reviewed for abuse of discretion
- Federal Judicial Center: The history and workings of the U.S. court system can now be explored with a variety of easy-to-navigate and interactive tools available on revamped website
