Law Commons^™

Summary Judgment Rates Over Time, Across Case Categories, And Across Districts: An Empirical Study Of Three Large Federal Districts, Theodore Eisenberg, Charlotte Lanvers

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Prior research on summary judgment hypothesizes a substantial increase in summary judgment rates after a trilogy of Supreme Court cases in 1986 and a disproportionate adverse effect of summary judgment on civil rights cases. This article analyzes summary judgment rates in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (EDPA) and the Northern District of Georgia (NDGA), for two time periods, 1980-81 and 2001-02. It also analyzes summary judgment rates for the Central District of California (CDCA) for 1980-81 and for other civil rights cases in the CDCA in 1975-76. The combined sample consists of over 5,000 cases. The three-district sample for 1980-81 …

Unifying Disparate Treatment (Really), Martin J. Katz

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

The Article will proceed in three parts. Part I will show the fragmented state of current disparate treatment law. Part II will demonstrate why this fragmentation is problematic as a normative matter, and why the I99I Civil Rights Act framework is superior to the Price Waterhouse and McDonnell Douglas frameworks. Part III will point the way toward a unified disparate treatment doctrine, in which all litigants will use the 1991 Act framework.

The Failure Of Title Vii As A Rights-Claiming System, Deborah Brake, Joanna L. Grossman

Articles

This Article takes a comprehensive look at the failure of Title VII as a system for claiming nondiscrimination rights. The Supreme Court's recent decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, 127 S. Ct. 2162 (2007), requiring an employee to assert a Title VII pay discrimination claim within 180 days of when the discriminatory pay decision was first made, marks the tip of the iceberg in this flawed system. In the past decade, Title VII doctrines at both ends of the rights-claiming process have become increasing hostile to employees. At the front end, Title VII imposes strict requirements on …

Settling The Matter: Does Title I Of The Ada Work?, Sharona Hoffman

Faculty Publications

Analysis of cases decided under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which addresses employment discrimination, reveals that defendants have consistently prevailed in well over 90% of cases since the ADA's inception. This empirical evidence has led many commentators to conclude that the ADA's Title I has failed to improve workplace conditions for individuals with disabilities.

This article attempts to assess the efficacy of Title I through a different lens. It focuses on several data sets that have previously received little attention. It examines Equal Employment Opportunity Commission merit resolutions, lawsuit settlement statistics, and reports concerning reasonable accommodation …

The Truth Is Out There: Revamping Federal Antidiscrimination Enforcement For The Twenty-First Century, Marcia L. Mccormick

All Faculty Scholarship

Employment discrimination laws in the United States have not created full equality in the workplace, although that was their goal. Real change requires greater accountability for those who make employment decisions and greater transparency to bolster that accountability. To provide that transparency and accountability, we need greater federal involvement in enforcement and a mechanism to publicize the state of the nation's workplaces. To accomplish this, I propose taking private sector employment discrimination disputes away from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission entirely, and starting with a new agency. The current model, with the EEOC writing compliance guidelines, encouraging mediation, and acting …

Civil Rights And Related Decisions, Eileen Kaufman

Scholarly Works

This article analyzes two cases from the October 2006 Supreme Court Term, Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. and Gonzales v. Carhart. The cases have much in common, even though Ledbetter concerns pay disparity claims based on gender and Gonzales concerns second trimester abortions. Both are five-four decisions which demonstrate how profoundly the appointment of Justice Samuel Alito to occupy Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's seat has affected the balance of power on the Court. The net result of this shift has been a devastating setback for women's rights. Both decisions prompted Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to uncharacteristically read aloud …