Call for a consultation
800-393-0045
Topic: Employment discrimination
Back to Topics- Supreme Court Applies “Cat’s Paw” Rule: Employer is Liable In Case Where Supervisor Discriminated, Even Though Decision-Maker May Have Acted Without Bias
- California Supreme Court Upholds Employee Rights By Allowing “Stray Remarks” To Help Prove Workplace Discrimination
- California Supreme Court Upholds Employee Rights By Allowing “Stray Remarks” To Help Prove Workplace Discrimination
- California Supreme Court Upholds Proposition 209 Against Attack that It Violates the “Political Structure” Doctrine Established by the U.S. Supreme Court
- Disability Discrimination & Failure to Accommodate - California Court Places Burden on Plaintiff to Initiate Process of Finding “Reasonable Accommodation”
- Hostile Work Environment Claims under FEHA – Hostility Must be Directed at the Plaintiff
- In Age Discrimination Case, Plaintiff Must Show Qualifications Superior To Chosen Candidate
- Court Rejects Use of Gender Stereotypes and Rules that Ban on Male Supervisors at Women’s Prison Violates Title VII
- Employees Can Sue For Application of Discriminatory Standards That Were Adopted Years Ago; U.S. Supreme Court Rules That Each New Application of Challenged Standards Constitutes a New Cause of Action Under Title VII