Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- remedies (law) (1)
- Civil Rights Act (1)
- Class actions (1)
- Consumer protection (1)
- Discrimination (1)
-
- Discrimination in employment (1)
- Disparate treatment (1)
- Drugs – law and legislation (1)
- Employment (1)
- Equality before the law (1)
- Federal courts (1)
- Federal litigation (1)
- National origin (1)
- Pharmaceutical industry (1)
- Product liability (1)
- Race (1)
- Separation of powers (1)
- Sex (1)
- Title VII (1)
- Worker (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Brief Of Brian Wolfman, Aderson B. Francois, And Eric Schnapper As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner In Peterson V. Linear Controls Incorporated, No. 18-1401 (U.S. Supreme Court June 6, 2019), Brian Wolfman, Aderson B. François
Brief Of Brian Wolfman, Aderson B. Francois, And Eric Schnapper As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner In Peterson V. Linear Controls Incorporated, No. 18-1401 (U.S. Supreme Court June 6, 2019), Brian Wolfman, Aderson B. François
U.S. Supreme Court Briefs
In Title VII disparate-treatment, employment-discrimination cases, the term “adverse employment action” originally developed as judicial shorthand for the statute’s text, which broadly prohibits any discriminatory conduct by an employer against an employee based on the employee's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. See 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2(a)(1). But what started simply as shorthand has taken on a life of its own and now improperly limits the statute’s reach. The Fifth Circuit’s version of the adverse-employment-action rule stands out as especially improper: Only an “ultimate employment decision”—a refusal to hire, a firing, a demotion, or the like—constitutes impermissible discrimination.
In this …
Amicus Briefs Of The National Association Of Consumer Advocates In Day V. Persels & Associates, 729 F.3d 1309 (11th Cir. 2013), Brian Wolfman
Amicus Briefs Of The National Association Of Consumer Advocates In Day V. Persels & Associates, 729 F.3d 1309 (11th Cir. 2013), Brian Wolfman
U.S. Supreme Court Briefs
These amicus briefs are likely to interest legal academics and practitioners who write, research, and practice in the areas of (1) federal courts, (2) class actions, (3) separation of powers, (4) constitutional law more generally, and (4) federal litigation.
In Day v. Persels & Associates, 729 F.3d 1309 (11th Cir. 2013), an absent class member objected to a class-action settlement. The objector argued that the settlement was unfair because, among other reasons, it provided no monetary recovery to the class members. In the district court, prior to class certification and settlement, the defendants and the named plaintiff had consented …
Brief Of Amici Curiae Former Fda Commissioners Dr. Donald Kennedy And Dr. David A. Kessler In Support Of Respondent, Wyeth V. Levine, No. 06-1249 (U.S. Aug. 14, 2008), Kathryn A. Sabbeth, David C. Vladeck
Brief Of Amici Curiae Former Fda Commissioners Dr. Donald Kennedy And Dr. David A. Kessler In Support Of Respondent, Wyeth V. Levine, No. 06-1249 (U.S. Aug. 14, 2008), Kathryn A. Sabbeth, David C. Vladeck
U.S. Supreme Court Briefs
No abstract provided.
Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari, Scott V. Johanns, No. 05-356 (U.S. Sept. 15, 2005), Scott L. Nelson, David C. Vladeck
Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari, Scott V. Johanns, No. 05-356 (U.S. Sept. 15, 2005), Scott L. Nelson, David C. Vladeck
U.S. Supreme Court Briefs
No abstract provided.