Recent News & Info: Employment Law

Case Summaries

Civil Rights

[09/08] Adrian v. Yorktown
In an action alleging that defendant-town, through its town supervisor and other policy-making officials, maintained an official policy under which the plaintiffs were denied the right to develop their property, and subsequently retaliated against for their exercise of their First Amendment rights, a district court's order denying post-verdict interest is vacated where, if a mandate reinstating a jury verdict does not order entry of a judgment in a specific dollar amount, and also makes no mention of interest, the district court retains the power to award post-verdict interest on remand.

[09/08] Rhodes v. Robinson
In an action alleging that prison guards violated plaintiff's civil rights by retaliating against him for exercising his First Amendment right to pursue the prison grievance process against them, a dismissal of the complaint is reversed in part where the new claims in plaintiff's second amended complaint (SAC) should not have been dismissed, because they were properly exhausted before he tendered his SAC to the district court for filing.

[09/08] Alvarado-Santos v. Dep't of Health of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico
In plaintiff's suit against her former employer, claiming national origin and gender discrimination under Title VII, jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff is reversed as defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law because, based on the evidence presented at trial, no reasonable jury could find that the nonrenewal of plaintiff's contract was based on her gender and/or national origin.

[09/08] Grider v. Auburn
In an action by plaintiffs who owned a bar/restaurant in Auburn, Alabama, against City of Auburn and City employees under state tort law and 42 U.S.C. section 1983 for violations of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, claiming that the City and its agents filed false bribery charges and selectively enforced regulatory laws in order to harm plaintiffs' business, a denial of summary judgment based on qualified immunity is affirmed in part where, absent the offering of funds, there was no bribery and no arguable probable cause for defendant-officer to arrest plaintiff. However, the order is reversed in part where plaintiffs lacked evidence that the city defendants conspired with the officer to maliciously prosecute plaintiff.

Read More

Labor & Employment Law

[09/08] McKissick v. Yuen
In an action against plaintiff's former company and two of its former officers, accusing them of perpetrating a fraud that rendered her stock options in the company worthless, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) the parties' separation agreement unambiguously barred plaintiff's claims; and 2) although the separation agreement entitled defendant to recoup the attorney's fees it incurred in defending the suit, the agreement did not permit the company to recover the fees it incurred in prosecuting a counterclaim against plaintiff.

[09/08] Murphy v. Deloitte & Touche Grp. Ins. Plan
In an action concerning defendant's denial of disability benefits under an ERISA plan, summary judgment for defendant is vacated where: 1) the court's case law prohibited courts from considering materials outside the administrative record where the extra-record materials sought to be introduced related to a claimant's eligibility for benefits; and 2) neither a claimant nor an administrator should be allowed to use discovery to engage in unnecessarily broad discovery that slows the efficient resolution of an ERISA claim.

[09/08] Alvarado-Santos v. Dep't of Health of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico
In plaintiff's suit against her former employer, claiming national origin and gender discrimination under Title VII, jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff is reversed as defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law because, based on the evidence presented at trial, no reasonable jury could find that the nonrenewal of plaintiff's contract was based on her gender and/or national origin.

[09/08] Brown v. Auto. Components Holdings, LLC
In plaintiff's suit against her former employer for interference with her rights under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), district court's entry of summary judgment in favor of the defendant is affirmed as defendant's termination of plaintiff's employment based on her noncompliance with its internal leave procedures did not violate the FMLA because the undisputed facts establish that plaintiff was absent without leave after failing to give proper FMLA notice for an extension of a previously requested leave period.

Read More