Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons^™

Expanding The Hostile Environment Theory To Cover Age Discrimination: How Far Is Too Far?, Julie Vigil

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Employment Discrimination Claims Remain Valid Despite After-Acquired Evidence Of Employee Wrongdoing, Christine Neylon O'Brien

Pepperdine Law Review

This article explores the legal practice area of employment discrimination and adverse decisions based on after-acquired evidence. A division among the circuits courts arose concerning the impact of after-acquired evidence of employee wrongdoing upon an employer's liability for employment discrimination. When pre-trial discovery unveiled a separate nondiscriminatory reason for termination, numerous circuits allowed such previously unknown information to constitute a legitimate basis for the employment decision, following the model of a mixed-motive discharge. A trend developed however, among other circuits that after-acquired evidence of employee misconduct should not prevent the establishment of employer liability, but that it should be considered …

Admission Possible: Reconsidering The Impact Of Eeoc Reasonable Cause Determinations In The Ninth Circuit, Michael D. Moberly

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Paramours, Promotions, And Sexual Favoritism: Unfair, But Is There Liability?, Mitchell Poole

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Burlington Industries, Inc. V. Ellerth: “Whole-Cloth Creation” Or Manifestation Of Congressional Intent?, John Corrington

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Subordinate Bias Liability, Theresa M. Beiner

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

Often, decisions regarding employment are made with the input of or based on the observations of more than one person. This presents complications for employment discrimination plaintiffs seeking to prove discriminatory animus resulting in an adverse employment decision for the plaintiff. Specifically, many plaintiffs are left to deal with the unresolved issue of whether they have a claim for employment discrimination when a discriminating non-decision making coworker or direct supervisor supplies incorrect or distorted information to their superiors who have the authority to fire them. This is known as the "cat's paw" theory of liability or "subordinate bias liability."

The …

I'M So Lonesome I Could Cry ... But Could I Sue?: Whether 'Interacting With Others' Is A Major Life Activity Under The Ada, Bryan P. Stephenson

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Law Firms As Defendants: Family Responsibilities Discrimination In Legal Workplaces, Joan C. Williams, Stephanie Bornstein, Diana Reddy, Betsy A. Williams

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Keeping Discrimination Theory Front And Center In The Discourse Over Work And Family Conflict, Laura T. Kessler

Pepperdine Law Review

This essay is a contribution to a symposium on balancing career and family. It frames the problem of work/family conflict as a form of sex discrimination. It demonstrates that many of the constructs commonly used to illustrate an absence of employment discrimination - such as the accident, opt-out, time-lag theories - actually fit quite comfortably within various discrimination frameworks. It also contextualizes the problem of work/family conflict within the larger issue of gender bias in the workplace, demonstrating how each contributes to and works together to produce workplace inequality for women. This approach contrasts with the traditional bifurcation of gender …

The Disability History Mystery: Assessing The Employer's Reasonable Accommodation Obligation In "Record Of Disability" Cases, Michael D. Moberly

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ledbetter V. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 550 U.S. 618 (2007): Faithful To Title Vii Or Blind To Sex Discrimination?, Garrett M. Fahy

The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law

No abstract provided.

Execution In Virginia, 1859: The Trials Of Green And Copeland, Steven Lubet

Faculty Working Papers

This essay tells the story of Shields Green and John Copeland, two black men who joined John Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry. Along with Brown and several others, Green and Copeland were taken prisoner in the aftermath of the failed insurrection, and they were brought to trial in nearby Charlestown on charges of murder and treason. Unlike Brown, who was treated respectfully by his captors, Green and Copeland were handled roughly. Copeland in particular was subjected to a harsh interrogation that was criticized even by pro-slavery Democrats in the North. The black prisoners did, however, have the benefit of a …

Title Vii Works - That's Why We Don't Like It, Chuck Henson

Faculty Publications

In response to the universal belief that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is not fulfilling its purpose, this Article presents a different perspective on the reality of this federal employment discrimination law. Title VII is fulfilling the purpose of the Congress that created it. The purpose was not the eradication of all discrimination in employment. The purpose was to balance the prohibition of the most obvious forms of discrimination with the preservation of as much employer decision-making latitude as possible. Moreover, the seminal Supreme Court decision, McDonnell Douglas v. Green, accurately implemented this balance. This Article …

Implicit Bias In Employment Litigation, Melissa R. Hart

Melissa R Hart

Judges exercise enormous discretion in civil litigation, and nowhere more than in employment discrimination litigation, where the trial court’s “common sense” view of what is or is not “plausible” has significant impact on the likelihood that a case will survive summary judgment. As a general matter, doctrinal developments in the past two decades have quite consistently made it more difficult for plaintiffs to assert their claims of discrimination. In addition, many of these doctrines have increased the role of judicial judgment – and the possibility of the court’s implicit bias – in the life cycle of an employment discrimination case. …

Quality Of Healthcare And The Role Of Relationships: Bridging The Medico-Legal Divide, Sagit Mor, Orna Rabinovich-Einy

Sagit Mor

This article focuses on an often overlooked barrier to efforts to enhance the quality of health care: the relationship crisis that currently exists between physicians and patients. This state of affairs has resulted from the divide between the medical and legal worlds. The medical arena has understandably tended to view the doctor-patient relationship as a purely medical issue, ignoring the law’s impact in generating and sustaining problematic relationship patterns. The legal world has yet to fully recognize this state of affairs, and the law’s role in its evolution and persistence. We offer a relational approach to healthcare law as a …

Soul Of A Woman: The Sex Stereotyping Prohibition At Work, Kimberly A. Yuracko

Faculty Working Papers

In 1989 the Supreme Court in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins declared that sex stereotyping was a prohibited from of sex discrimination at work. This seemingly simple declaration has been the most important development in sex discrimination jurisprudence since the passage of Title VII. It has been used to extend the Act's coverage and protect groups that were previously excluded. Astonishingly, however, the contours, dimensions and requirements of the prohibition have never been clearly articulated by courts or scholars. In this paper I evaluate four interpretations of what the sex stereotyping prohibition might mean in order to determine what it actually …

Taking In Strays: A Critique Of The Stray Comment Doctrine In Employment Discrimination Law, Kerri Lynn Stone

Faculty Publications

This Article traces the genesis of this misguided doctrine, its proliferation, and it’s many flaws. It explains what the doctrine has come to mean and which facets of a comment can render it “stray” as a matter of law. Part II evaluates this unwieldy and untenable doctrine and its haphazard and misguided application over the past two decades. Specifically, it was never intended to be a formal doctrine. As employed by courts, the term “stray” means too many things and is too ambiguous for the doctrine to be coherent or effective. Moreover, courts ascribe varying degrees of significance to the …

Subordinate Bias Liability, Theresa M. Beiner

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Undermining Congressional Overrides: The Hydra Problem In Statutory Interpretation, Deborah Widiss

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Statutory overrides — that is, amendments to supersede a judicial interpretation of a statute — are the primary mechanism by which Congress signals disagreement with court interpretations; they are essential to protect the separation of powers and the promise of legislative supremacy. But in Gross v. FBL Financial Services, the Supreme Court held that Congress’s override of a judicial interpretation of Title VII did not control the interpretation of identical language in the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and further that Congress’s “neglecting” to amend the ADEA when it amended Title VII was a clear signal that Congress intended the …

Plausibility Pleading And Employment Discrimination, Suzette M. Malveaux

Publications

No abstract provided.

Punitive Damages, Due Process, And Employment Discrimination, Joseph Seiner

Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court has failed to provide any substantive guidance on when punitive damages are appropriate in employment discrimination cases since it issued its seminal decision in Kolstad v. American Dental Ass'n over twelve years ago. The Court has recently expanded its punitive damages jurisprudence in the high-profile decisions of Philip Morris USA v. Williams and Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker. While these cases dramatically altered the way exemplary relief is analyzed in civil cases, the extent to which these decisions apply in the workplace context remains unclear. Surprisingly, there has been almost no academic literature to date explaining how …