legitimate

Transgender former police officer states a claim under Title VII-but fails to show sufficient evidence of discrimination

Posted on June 18, 2015

Last week, the district court ruled that although discrimination based on transgender status was a cognizable claim under Title VII, the plaintiff had failed to demonstrate that the rejection of her application to be part of a volunteer mounted patrol was discriminatory. Finkle v. Howard County, Maryland, Case No. SAG-13-3236 (D. Md. June 12, 2015).…

READ MORE

No FMLA Retaliation Where Employer Can Show Employee Terminated for Improperly Accessing Supervisor’s Email

Posted on October 10, 2014

The decision of the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia in the case of Downs v. Winchester Medical Center, et al., No. 5:13cv00083 regarding what constitutes a claim for interference in violation of the FMLA was the topic of a posting from a few months ago. The district court had found that while the plaintiff had properly stated a claim for retaliation in violation of the FMLA based upon these allegations, but that her claims not support a claim for FMLA interference.   Last month, the district court granted summary judgment to the employer, finding that the employer had a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the termination of the employee, namely, her inappropriate accessing of her supervisor’s email, and thus that her retaliation claim failed as a matter of law. Downs, Memorandum Opinion (August 18, 2014).…

READ MORE

No USERRA Claim Where Vet Terminated Based on Threats Made Against Co-workers

Posted on September 26, 2014
Posted in Other

In a recent decision, a judge in the Eastern District of Virginia dismissed the claims asserted by a United States Army veteran with PTSD that his employer had terminated him in violation of both the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemplyoment Rights Act (“USERRA”) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). Williamson v. Bon Secours Richmond Health System, Inc., Case No. 3:13-cv-704 (July 28, 2014). In this case, other employees had reported that the plaintiff had made a number of threatening statements about taking violent actions against co-workers. The court found that the employer was entitled to judgment as a matter of law on plaintiff’s claims of discrimination under USERRA and the ADA and his failure to accommodate claim under the ADA.…

READ MORE
Lawyer Search