Legal Updates
John Gause monitors what’s happening in employment discrimination, civil rights, and tort law. He shares some of what he finds on this page.
Wednesday, January 6, 2016
- US District Court ME: Following substantive changes to deposition testimony on errata sheet by plaintiff, Magistrate allowed defendant to reopen plaintiff’s deposition to ask follow-up questions on the reasons for the changes
- US District Court ME: Magistrate denied plaintiff’s motion for leave to designate (after the expert designation deadline) second treating nurse practitioner to testify that he had a protected disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Maine Human Rights Act after the first nurse practitioner that he designated testified unfavorably
- US District Court ME: In denying summary judgment on plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment excessive force claim, Magistrate held that plaintiff was not required to personally identify the officers who engaged in the alleged unlawful conduct (plaintiff could not unequivocally identify who took him to the ground, who injured his arm, and who knelt on his head)
- MHRC: January 11, 2016 Commission Meeting Agenda & Consent Agenda posted
- Press Herald: Six men sue Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland, alleging abuse decades ago
Wednesday, December 30, 2015
- EEOC: New resource document issued: “Questions and Answers for Employers: Responsibilities Concerning the Employment of Individuals Who Are, or Are Perceived to Be, Muslim or Middle Eastern”
- EEOC: New resource document issued: “Questions and Answers for Employees: Workplace Rights of Employees Who Are, or Are Perceived to Be, Muslim or Middle Eastern
- US District Court ME: In denying motion to dismiss harassment, retaliation, and constitutional claims brought by former nurse at the Maine State Prison against the DOC and nurse’s direct employer, the court held, in part, that the complaint sufficiently alleged a “joint employer” relationship for purposes of Title VII, the MHRA, and the MWPA, and that allegations of daily offensive racially derogatory remarks—made by state employees at a state-operated facility— involve a matter of public concern warranting First Amendment protection
- US District Court ME: In granting Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss age discrimination complaint, the court held that mere allegation that termination was because of age was not “plausible on its face” without supporting factual allegations, and inference of age discrimination was undercut by the fact that plaintiff was hired in his late 50s and terminated at age 64
- US District Court ME: In denying motion for summary judgment on ADA and MHRA disability discrimination claims, the court found sufficient evidence that plaintiff was “qualified” despite request for indefinite leave extension where employer told plaintiff he needed to be off all medications before returning to work
- First Circuit: In affirming dismissal of § 1983 Due Process claim that employer failed to provide an adequate “name-clearing” forum, the court held that complaint did not allege all five of the elements of the claim, which are: (1) the alleged defamatory statement must seriously damage the employee’s standing and association in the community; (2) the employee must dispute the statement as false; (3) the statement must have been intentionally publicized by the government; (4) the stigmatizing statement must have been made in conjunction with an alteration of the employee’s legal status, such as the termination of his employment; and (5) the government must have failed to comply with the employee’s request for a name-clearing hearing
Wednesday, December 23, 2015
- Bangor Daily: LePage nominates chief counsel, two others to District Court bench
- US Department of Transportation: Circular provides compliance guidance on the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 for public transit services, including fixed route bus, complementary paratransit, demand responsive, rail (rapid, light, and commuter), and water transportation/passenger ferries
- EEOC: Lawsuit filed against McDonald’s alleges disability discrimination when manager canceled job interview after learning that applicant who is deaf needed an interpreter for interview
Saturday, December 19, 2015
Wednesday, December 16, 2015
- Law Court: The court held that plaintiff engaged in protected activity under the Maine Whistleblowers’ Protection Act when she complained about resident safety issues (in a nursing home) that implicated but did not violate the applicable standard of care; and there was sufficient evidence that she was fired for making the complaints even though the decisionmaker testified that she did not know about them, where decisionmaker held a position in which she likely would have heard of them and the termination came a couple days after complaints
- Ninth Circuit: The court held that human resources manager engaged in protected activity under the Fair Labor Standards Act anti-retaliation provision by complaining that employer was not in compliance with FLSA, where FLSA compliance was not part of her regular job duties
- First Circuit: In upholding jury verdict on Fair Labor Standards Act retaliation claim, the court, in part, reversed district court’s vacating as a matter of law entire front-pay claim ($450,000) that rested only on plaintiff’s testimony about his future employment plans
- MHRC: December 14th meeting minutes posted
- Press Herald: Maine’s high court clears way for lawsuit against Scarborough nursing home
- Bangor Daily: Black nurse’s discrimination lawsuit against state can proceed
Saturday, December 12, 2015
- First Circuit: The court declined to reach whether an employee of a federal subcontractor could bring a First Amendment Bivens claim because the complaint failed to plausibly demonstrate a right to recovery and dismissed under Rule 8(a)(2)); and affirmed summary judgment on Title VII retaliation claim, finding that plaintiff was not an “employee” of federal agency under EEOC factors and only “employees” may bring Title VII claims
- First Circuit: In reversing summary judgment for employer on Fair Labor Standards Act unpaid overtime claim, the court found disputed facts on whether plaintiffs’ primary duty was management (which would make them exempt from overtime pay)
- MHRC: January 11th Commission Meeting Agenda posted
- Sun Journal: Assistant who was asked to watch chick flicks settles suit with Bates College
- Bangor Daily: Family of man killed by Hampden officer drops lawsuit
Saturday, December 5, 2015
- Law Court: Oral arguments scheduled for December 8-10 include Cum-15-67 (negligence claim following fall down staircase), Cum-15-60 (whether Whistleblower plaintiff was constructively discharged because employer led her to reasonably believe that she was about to be fired and whether there was a “joint employer” relationship), and Ken-15-29 (whether “other-owned-vehicle” exclusions in underinsured motorist policies barred coverage under more than one policy)
- US DOJ: Guidance issued on Americans with Disabilities Act requirements when restriping parking spaces
- MHRC: 2016 Meeting Schedule posted
- Bangor Daily: Jury finds against Southern Aroostook coach fired after hazing incident
- Bangor Daily: Worker sues Whole Foods for racial discrimination at Maine store
- Bangor Daily: Lawsuit alleges excessive force in Woodville man’s 2014 death
Wednesday, December 2, 2015
- Eleventh Circuit: In a matter of first impression (and parting ways with three other circuits), the court held that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act authorizes disparate impact claims by applicants for employment (in addition to employees); the court also held that “equitable tolling” excused plaintiff’s failure to file timely complaint with EEOC where he alleged that he did not know nor could he have known that he had been discriminated against until after the deadline had passed, regardless of whether there was misrepresentation by defendant
- Tenth Circuit: The court held that, for purposes of ADA and ADEA claims, although County was not plaintiff jailer/dispatcher’s “joint employer” (plaintiff was directly employed by Sheriff’s Office), it was nevertheless her employer under basic agency principles because the Sheriff was a County officer and the Sheriff’s Office merely a subordinate department of the County
- EEOC: New guidance addressed to health providers, “Helping Patients with HIV Infection Who Need
Accommodations at Work,” identifies common reasonable accommodations as altered break and work schedules (e.g., frequent breaks to rest or use the restroom or a change in schedule to accommodate medical appointments), changes in supervisory methods (e.g., written instructions from a supervisor who usually does not provide them), accommodations for visual impairments (e.g., magnifiers, screen reading software, and qualified readers), ergonomic office furniture, unpaid leave for treatment or recuperation, and permission to work from home - US District Court ME: The court denied summary judgment to employer on age discrimination claim where discussions about plaintiff’s alleged performance issues started within six months of his supervisor discussing his retirement plans (he was 61 and said he wanted to retire at 66), other employees had “general concern” about age bias, and, although employer claimed plaintiff was insubordinate, it did not institute formal discipline as prescribed by its policies
- US District Court ME: New Local Rules effective 12/1/2015
- US DOJ: Supplement to the 2013 DOJ/DOT Joint Technical Assistance on the Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act Requirements To Provide Curb Ramps when Streets, Roads, or Highways are Altered through Resurfacing
- EEOC: $582,000 settlement reached in Title VII sexual harassment claim that manager regularly touched female employees on their buttocks, hips, and backs, forcibly kissed them and made comments about their appearance and body parts
- Bangor Daily: Judge rules ex-Orono fire chief’s lawsuit over his firing may go forward
- Press Herald: Former meat manager files racial discrimination lawsuit against Whole Foods
Wednesday, November 25, 2015
- MHRC: November 23rd meeting minutes include that the Governor’s Office has refused to permit the Maine Department of Education to jointly issue proposed rules interpreting the education provisions of the Maine Human Rights Act, prompting the Commission to issue guidance instead (at a future date)
- Bangor Daily: Rights commission backs 2 discrimination claims against BIW
- Bangor Daily: Widower awarded $1 million in wrongful death suit against killer
- Bangor Daily: Attorney for disabled Maine shipyard workers eyes lawsuit
