Law Commons^™

Three New Actions Enter Legal Landscape, Lance Plunkett Jd, Llm

The New York State Dental Journal

Latest legal maneuvers cover a variety of fronts with potential impact on dental practices.

Dentistry And The Law: Risk Of Employment Discrimination In Job Advertisements, Dan Schulte Jd

The Journal of the Michigan Dental Association

Employment discrimination in job advertisements that include religious references, such as statements like "faith-based practice" or symbols like crosses, is a legal concern. Federal and Michigan state laws, particularly the Elliot Larson Civil Rights Act (ELCRA), prohibit discrimination in employment, encompassing various protected classes. ELCRA applies to all employers in Michigan, regardless of their size. Violating ELCRA can lead to legal consequences, including injunctive relief and compensatory damages. Including such references or symbols in job ads can be used as evidence against employers in discrimination claims, even if rejected candidates have lesser qualifications. Publishers of these ads are also at …

Maternity Rights: A Comparative View Of Mexico And The United States, Roberto Rosas

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Women play a large role in the workplace and require additional protection during pregnancy, childbirth, and while raising children. This article compares how Mexico and the United States have approached the issue of maternity rights and benefits. First, Mexico provides eighty-four days of paid leave to mothers, while the United States provides unpaid leave for up to twelve weeks. Second, Mexico allows two thirty-minute breaks a day for breastfeeding, while the United States allows a reasonable amount of time per day to breastfeed. Third, Mexico provides childcare to most federal employees, while the United States provides daycares to a small …

Ambivalence And Activism: Employment Discrimination In China, Timothy Webster

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Chinese courts have not vigorously enforced many human rights, but a recent string of employment discrimination lawsuits suggests that, given the appropriate conditions, advocacy strategies, and rights at issue, victims can vindicate constitutional and statutory rights to equality in court. Specifically, carriers of the hepatitis B virus (HBV) have used the 2007 Employment Promotion Law to ground legal challenges against employers who discriminate against them in the hiring process. Plaintiffs' relatively high success rate suggests official support for making one prevalent form of discrimination illegal. Central to these lawsuits is a broad network of lawyers, activists, and scholars who actively …

Invisible Actors: Genetic Testing And Genetic Discrimination In The Workplace, Susannah Carr

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

Current federal and state law is inadequate to protect employees from employer's misuse of their genetic information. Genetic information is knowledge of a person's genome that indicates a predisposition towards an illness, disease, or medical condition, where symptoms of the condition have yet to manifest themselves. Federal law protections are insufficient, and relevant state laws vary in their scope and application. Not only are employees unevenly protected across the United States, but varying standards also make complying with the law difficult for interstate employees.

To give employees sufficient protection and to facilitate employer compliance, Congress should pass a law specifically …

Reeves V. Sanderson Plumbing Products: The Emperor Has No Clothes - Pretext Plus Is Alive And Kicking., Matthew R. Scott, Russell D. Chapman

St. Mary's Law Journal

Before the Supreme Court’s decision in Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc., the Fifth Circuit’s en banc decision in Rhodes v. Guiberson Oil Tools established the proper standard of causation in employment discrimination cases. The plaintiff must prove his or her protected trait was the “determinative reason” for the challenged employment action. Following Reeves, which appeared to overrule Rhodes and the doctrine of pretext plus, the Fifth Circuit struggled with the causation question. Despite the apparent confusion, the Fifth Circuit has largely reaffirmed not only its commitment to the Rhodes pretext-plus analysis, but also the determinative-reason standard for pretext cases. …

Making Sense Of Pretext: An Analysis Of Evidentiary Requirements For Summary Judgment Litigants In The Fifth Circuit In Light Of Reeves V. Sanderson Plumbing Prodcuts, And A Proposal For Clarification., Eric S. Riester

St. Mary's Law Journal

Although the United States Supreme Court in Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. attempted to clarify the summary judgment landscape of Title VII employment discrimination cases, lower courts in the Fifth Circuit are still without guidance. Under Reeves, direct proof of discrimination is not required to defeat a motion for summary judgment as long as the circumstantial evidence allows a reasonable inference of discrimination. The required strength of the circumstantial evidence, however, remains a major issue in the Fifth Circuit. Since Reeves, the Fifth Circuit has not stated a uniform summary judgment standard, nor has it answered how much circumstantial …

Can Employers Put Genetic Information To Good Use, Kathleen C. Engel

Journal of Law and Health

In my talk today I am going to try to answer the question: Can employers put genetic information to good use? Preparing this talk was a challenge because it required me to switch sides of the table. Having represented plaintiffs in employment discrimination cases for ten years, my inclination is to focus on the ways that employers can use genetic information to the detriment of their workers. I chose to talk about the value of genetic information from the employers' perspective because I wanted to force myself to engage in a disciplined study of the issues, rather than simply don …

Genetic Testing And Employment Litigation, Harry Zanville

Journal of Law and Health

I have only a couple of comments to make that relate to litigation hurdles and how to achieve this balance, and the first thing I want to talk about, following the wonderful presentation is, in fact, we probably don't in some ways even need a new cause of action.

Employers Beware: The Ninth Circuit's Rejection Of The "Direct Threat To Self" Disability Discrimination Defense In Echazabal V. Chevron, Sheehan Sullivan

Seattle University Law Review

This Note will address whether the Ninth Circuit should have upheld the "direct threat to self" defense in Echazabal v. Chevron. First, the Note will introduce the "direct threat to self" debate in the context of the ADA's language, the EEOC-outlined regulatory provisions, and the case law surrounding the direct threat question. Specifically, the Note will address (1) the relationship between the ADA and the EEOC, (2) the compatiblity of the ADA with the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and (3) the case law applying the EEOC regulations, the ADA provisions, and the Rehabilitation Act provisions. Next, the Note will …

Defining The Limits Of Federal Court Jurisdiction Over States In Bankruptcy Court., Patricia L. Barsalou

St. Mary's Law Journal

Sovereign immunity jurisprudence has always been a confusing jumble of assumptions which seem incomprehensible. Despite the confusion, understanding sovereign immunity has become more important in the wake of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida. The constitutional issues raised in Seminole Tribe amount to a reinterpretation of the fundamental balance of power between federal and state governments and the power of Congress to affect that balance. Not all sovereign immunity is sovereign immunity. Many courts use the term to identify both the common-law doctrine and the “immunity” granted to the states through the Eleventh …

Nonparties To Employment Discrimination Consent Decrees May Attack, In A Collateral Lawsuit, Decisions Made Pursuant To The Decrees., Michael T. Larkin

St. Mary's Law Journal

In Martin v. Wilks, the United States Supreme Court held nonparties to employment discrimination consent decrees may attack, in a collateral lawsuit, decisions made pursuant to the decrees. A consent decree is a voluntary judgment between parties which facilitates settlement of litigation by providing one party with equitable relief. Courts retain jurisdiction over parties to a consent decree, and they can issue contempt orders to parties violating the terms of the decree. Unlike judgments, the parties cannot challenge the consent decrees, except in limited circumstances. Recently, federal courts have widened the scope of preclusion law by defining the term “claim” …

Aids—The Legal Implications, Frances Means

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.