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.
Thursday, August 6, 2015
- Second Circuit: In resolving apparent tension between two Supreme Court cases, Swierkiewicz and Iqbal, the court held that the facts required to be alleged in a Title VII complaint need not give plausible support to the ultimate question of whether the adverse employment action was attributable to discrimination; they need only give plausible support to a minimal inference of discriminatory motivation
- First Circuit: In affirming judgment for plaintiff following jury verdict, the court held that defendant’s failure to file a motion for judgment as a matter of law or for a new trial precluded it from challenging the legal sufficiency of the evidence for the first time on appeal absent “clear and gross injustice,” which was not shown
- First Circuit: In affirming dismissal of lawsuit based on settlement agreement, the court held, in part, that the Supreme Court’s Kokkonen decision does not block a district court from enforcing a settlement agreement before the underlying suit has been dismissed
- US District Court: Magistrate recommended summary judgment for defendants on claims arising out of police officers’ use of a taser against plaintiff in his home, including claims for illegal entries, searches, and seizures; Maine Civil Rights Act; assault/excessive force; false imprisonment; trespass/illegal entry; and negligent infliction of emotional distress
- US DOJ: US Labor Department proposes rule extending religious liberty protections to participants in federally-funded job training, social service programs
- HUD: Rule proposed that would amend existing regulations regarding the equal participation of faith-based (religious) organizations in HUD programs
- MHRC: August 10th Commission Meeting cancelled
Saturday, August 1, 2015
- First Circuit: The court affirmed summary judgment for employer on Title VII disparate impact claim arising out of closure of call center, based, in part, on safe-harbor provision that provides that different treatment in different locations is permissible absent intentional discrimination (the court addressed the safe-harbor issue even though it was raised for the first time on appeal)
- First Circuit: The court held that § 1983 political discrimination claim was time-barred because it was brought more than one year (Puerto Rico has a one-year SOL) after plaintiff learned of her termination even though termination did not become effective until later and decision was made prior to pre-termination hearing
- MHRC: August 10, 2015 Commission Meeting Agenda & Consent Agenda posted
- Bangor Daily: In lawsuit, House Speaker Eves accuses LePage of blackmail
Wednesday, July 29, 2015
- Seventh Circuit: The court reversed summary judgment on inmate’s Eighth Amendment cruel and unusual punishment claim, finding two-month delay in treating GERD symptoms showed deliberate indifference
- EEOC: Title VII suit alleges, in part, a racially hostile work environment based on racist graffiti on bathroom walls of worksite
- Maine Supreme Judicial Court: Proposed amendments to the Maine Rules of Professional Conduct regarding the sale of a law practice would, in part, abrogate Rule 1.17 and adopt Rule 1.17A to no longer require the selling lawyer to leave the active practice of law entirely or sell the practice in its entirety
- Kennebec Journal: Rangeley EMT sues NorthStar, claiming sexual, religious discrimination
- Bangor Daily: Shaw’s seeks to move age discrimination lawsuit to federal court
Friday, July 24, 2015
- EEOC: In its first decision to so hold, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission held that “sexual orientation is inherently a ‘sex-based consideration,’ and an allegation of discrimination based on sexual orientation is necessarily an allegation of sex discrimination under Title VII. A complainant alleging that an agency took his or her sexual orientation into account in an employment action necessarily alleges that the agency took his or her sex into account.”
- Press Herald: Jury in Paul Kendrick defamation case awards $14.5 million to orphanage founder, charity
- US DOJ: $156, 674 Consent Decree posted in case alleging employer violated Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act by failing to provide individual with a back injury reassignment as a reasonable accommodation where employer’s policy was that employees with disabilities had to be best qualified for a vacant position when reassignment was a necessary accommodation
- US DOJ: $350,000 settlement agreement posted in case alleging cruise ships violated Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act
- Maine Supreme Judicial Court: Proposed revised fee schedule includes $100 fee for optional attorney identification cards
Tuesday, July 21, 2015
- First Circuit: In finding that no exception to Younger abstention applied to ERISA preemption claim brought by employer to stop Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination public hearing on disability discrimination claim, the court noted the potential viability of Americans with Disabilities Act claims based on differential benefits between disabilities (here, a 24-mos limit on LTD benefits for mental conditions but not physical)
- First Circuit: In affirming summary judgment for defendant on First Amendment political affiliation employment discrimination claim, the court held, in part, that demand that plaintiff explain his absence from work and asking him for documents in the presence of his co-workers “as if he was a child” were insufficient adverse actions to deter “a reasonably hardy individual from exercising constitutional rights”
- First Circuit: In affirming summary judgment for employer on Title VII retaliation claim, the court held, in part, that temporal proximity (2 months) between protected conduct and adverse job action (threats to fire plaintiff) was insufficient to show pretext where the timing of the threats “made sense” because they occurred when plaintiff’s sales numbers were low
- First Circuit: The court reversed summary judgment for defendant on one of plaintiff’s First Amendment claims, finding that the district court erred in finding that defendant established Mt. Healthy defense that same adverse action would have been taken had plaintiff not engaged in protected conduct
- First Circuit: The court, in part, affirmed the district court’s denial of qualified immunity on plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment claim on the ground that the law was clearly established in 2009 that an ICE agent required probable cause to issue an immigration detainer
- DC Circuit: The court held that plaintiffs were “prevailing parties,” entitled to attorney’s fees under Equal Access to Justice Act although defendant voluntarily corrected constitutional infirmity after court decision because the case was one in which the “terms of a remand are such that a substantive victory will obviously follow”
Thursday, July 16, 2015
- Law Court: The court affirmed summary judgment for attorney in legal malpractice action in which former client alleged that she would have had a higher Workers’ Comp settlement if defendant had advised her to do a work search, concluding that the factors producing the settlement could not be ascertained or weighed in hindsight and attempting to calculate an award of damages in the legal malpractice claim was speculative
- EEOC: Title VII religious discrimination complaint filed against UPS for enforcing policy prohibiting male employees in customer contact or supervisory positions from wearing beards or growing their hair below collar length, including Muslim applicant who wore a bear and a Rastafarian employee who did not cut his hair, both for religious reasons
- EEOC: $22,000 settlement reached in lawsuit involving a Seventh-Day Adventist who (for religious reasons) could not work from sunset on Friday until sunset on Saturday and whose job offer was revoked after he said he could not work on a Friday afternoon
- MHRC: August 10, 2015 Commission Meeting Agenda & Consent Agenda posted
Tuesday, July 14, 2015
- US DOJ: Updated “Frequently Asked Questions about Service Animals and the ADA” states that people with disabilities have the right to train a dog themselves and are not required to use a professional service dog training program but that a dog must already be trained before it can be taken into public places (service-animals-in-training are not covered)
- HUD: Guidance “Equal Access to Housing in HUD Programs Regardless of Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity Rule” posted
- EEOC: Lawsuit alleges employer failed to make and keep required records on the impact on protected classes of criminal background checks and criminal history assessments used to make hiring decisions
- Press Herald: Maine Human Rights Commission supports fired hotel worker’s retaliation claim
- Kennebec Journal: Former Augusta mayor settles lawsuit against developer
Saturday, July 11, 2015
- Fifth Circuit: The court affirmed verdict for inmates that being housed on death row in Louisiana prison in cells without air conditioning, while knowing that each suffers from conditions that render him extremely vulnerable to serious heat-related injury, violated their Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment
- Fourth Circuit: The court reversed summary judgment and allowed to proceed inmate’s First Amendment claims that prohibiting him from consuming wine during communion, requiring him to work on Sabbath days, and assigning him non-Christian cellmates violated his free exercise rights
- US District Court ME: In denying motion for a new trial after defense verdict in employment discrimination case, the court held, in part, that introduction of exhibit (plaintiff’s prescription history) provided to plaintiff for the first time one week before trial did not constitute an “unfair surprise” where plaintiff did not request a continuance and exhibit could have been used for impeachment purposes anyway
- US DOJ: Posted settlement agreement between skilled nursing facility and Department of Justice in Americans with Disabilities Act complaint alleging skilled nursing facility failed to provide sign language interpretive services when necessary to ensure effective communication with patients who are deaf
- HUD: Announced a final rule to equip communities that receive HUD funding with data and tools to help them meet long-standing fair housing obligations in their use of HUD funds
Wednesday, July 8, 2015
- Maine Superior Court: The court dismissed defamation and false light claims under the Maine anti-SLAPP statute (a special motion to dismiss claims based on the moving party’s exercise of the right of petition) because plaintiff did not show “economic damages” or severe emotional distress required to meet the “actual injury” test under the anti-SLAPP statute
- Maine Superior Court: In another case involving Maine’s anti-SLAPP statute, the court denied the motion because it was filed more than 60 days after service of the complaint (as contemplated by the statute) and defendant did not explain the reason for the delay
- Maine Superior Court: The court affirmed Unemployment Commission decision that petitioner was fired for “misconduct,” i.e., conduct tantamount to an intentional disregard of an employer’s interests, and was therefore ineligible for unemployment benefits where petitioner missed three consecutive work days because he was incarcerated for operating under the influence and had his brother inform employer on the first day that he was in jail and was unsure when he would be released
- Maine Superior Court: Noting that the “good cause” standard for setting aside a default under Rule 55(c) is less stringent than the “excusable neglect” standard, the court set aside default where served complaint was found unopened on bookkeeper’s desk
- MHRC: July 13, 2015 Commission Meeting Agenda & Consent Agenda posted
- Bangor Daily: Former Brunswick student sues over alleged bullying, sexual assault
Thursday, July 2, 2015
- Maine Supreme Judicial Court: Maine Bar Rules repealed and replaced, effective July 1, 2015
- US District Court ME: Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal of inmate’s Eighth Amendment claim arising out of seven-month delay in providing new eyeglasses, finding that, although courts have recognized that deficient eyesight can present a serious medical need for glasses, inmate alleged only that his current glasses were broken and did not assert that the glasses were unusable or how he had been affected by the lack of new eyeglasses
- US District Court ME: Following First Circuit and local District Court authority, the court granted defendant’s motion in limine that plaintiff may not disclose the ad damnum or demand a figure for pain and suffering damages to the jury
