Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Employment Discrimination: Recent Developments In The Supreme Court (Symposium: The Supreme Court And Local Government Law: The 1992-93 Term), Eileen Kaufman
Employment Discrimination: Recent Developments In The Supreme Court (Symposium: The Supreme Court And Local Government Law: The 1992-93 Term), Eileen Kaufman
Scholarly Works
At a symposium entitled, “The Supreme Court and Local Government Law; The 1992/93 Term”, Professor Eileen Kaufman spoke about the cases involving employment discrimination that were decided during that particular Term, Hazen Paper Company v. Biggins and St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks. While Hazen is an age discrimination case and St. Mary's is a Title VII case, they can be viewed as companion cases which serve to explain what an employment discrimination plaintiff must now establish when attempting to prove disparate treatment by indirect evidence. By way of preview, suffice it to say that plaintiff's task has been made …
A Standard For Punitive Damages Under Title Vii, Judith J. Johnson
A Standard For Punitive Damages Under Title Vii, Judith J. Johnson
Journal Articles
Under the Civil Rights Act of 1991, the plaintiff in an employment discrimination case who alleges intentional discrimination may recover punitive damages if she demonstrates that her employer engaged in the discriminatory practice with "malice" or "reckless indifference" to federally protected rights. To prove a case of disparate treatment under Title VII, the plaintiff bears the burden of persuading the trier of fact that her employer intended to discriminate against her. In other words, to be liable in a disparate treatment case, the employer has to specifically intend to treat the plaintiff differently based, for example, on her sex. If …