Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Civil Rights Act Of 1991: A “Quota Bill,” A Codification Of Griggs, A Partial Return To Wards Cove, Or All Of The Above?, Kingsley R. Browne
The Civil Rights Act Of 1991: A “Quota Bill,” A Codification Of Griggs, A Partial Return To Wards Cove, Or All Of The Above?, Kingsley R. Browne
Law Faculty Research Publications
No abstract provided.
Structures Of Subordination: Women Of Color At The Intersection Of Title Vii And The Nlra. Not!, Elizabeth M. Iglesias
Structures Of Subordination: Women Of Color At The Intersection Of Title Vii And The Nlra. Not!, Elizabeth M. Iglesias
Articles
No abstract provided.
Credulous Courts And The Tortured Trilogy: The Improper Use Of Summary Judgment In Title Vii And Adea Cases, Ann C. Mcginley
Credulous Courts And The Tortured Trilogy: The Improper Use Of Summary Judgment In Title Vii And Adea Cases, Ann C. Mcginley
Scholarly Works
Civil rights are under siege. In mid-1989, the United States Supreme Court decided several cases that severely limit the civil rights claims and remedies available to a plaintiff claiming employment discrimination. This Article examines the gradual and continuing erosion of the factfinder's role in federal employment discrimination cases and its replacement by an increasing use of summary judgment through which the courts make pretrial determinations formerly reserved for the factfinder at trial. This trend not only represents a major shift in court procedure and, in the case of age discrimination claims, a transfer of power from juries to judges, but …
Reinventing Reality: The Impermissible Intrusion Of After-Acquired Evidence In Title Vii Litigation, Ann C. Mcginley
Reinventing Reality: The Impermissible Intrusion Of After-Acquired Evidence In Title Vii Litigation, Ann C. Mcginley
Scholarly Works
This Article analyzes the use of after-acquired evidence to defeat a discrimination victim's claim against her employer. The use of the Mount Healthy and Price Waterhouse mixed motives analysis in after-acquired evidence cases is misplaced because it is impossible for the permissible motive—resume fraud—to have been a factor in the adverse employment decision. Furthermore, after the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, it would be an improper judicial intrusion upon the power of the legislature for courts to apply mixed motives analysis to these cases. Besides the constitutional limitation on the judiciary's power created by the Civil Rights …
State Responses To Task Force Reports On Race And Ethnic Bias In The Courts, Suellyn Scarnecchia
State Responses To Task Force Reports On Race And Ethnic Bias In The Courts, Suellyn Scarnecchia
Articles
While several states have embarked on studies of race and ethnic bias in their courts, Minnesota is only the sixth to publish its report to date. As Minnesota joins the ranks of states with published reports, it is worthwhile to assess the impact of the five earlier published reports from other states. Final reports have been published in Michigan (1989), Washington (1990), New York (1991), Florida (1991) and New Jersey (1992). The published reports make findings and provide several specific recommendations for change. This article will review the published findings and recommendations of the task forces and will discuss the …
Liberty Vs. Equality: In Defense Of Privileged White Males, Nancy E. Dowd
Liberty Vs. Equality: In Defense Of Privileged White Males, Nancy E. Dowd
UF Law Faculty Publications
In this book review, Professor Dowd reviews Forbidden Grounds: The Case Against Employment Discrimination Laws, by Richard A. Epstein (1992). First, Professor Dowd sets forth the thesis and arguments of Epstein’s book and explores her general criticisms in more detail. Next, she explores Epstein’s core argument pitting liberty against equality from two perspectives: that of the privileged white male and that of minorities and women. Finally, Professor Dowd argues that Epstein’s position cannot be viewed as an argument that most minorities or women would make, as it fails to take account of their stories.