Law Commons^™

Stopped At The Starting Gate: The Overuse Of Summary Judgment In Equal Pay Cases, Deborah Thompson Eisenberg

Deborah Thompson Eisenberg

Prepared for a symposium about the overuse of summary judgment in employment discrimination cases, this Article provides a grassroots empirical analysis of what is happening in equal pay cases on the front lines of the district courts. Analyzing a database of 500 federal district court decisions—both published and unpublished—that considered whether to grant summary judgment on an equal pay claim from 2000 to 2011, the review shows that dismissing equal pay claims at the summary judgment stage has become the modus operandi for most federal courts. Courts granted 68% of summary judgment motions in equal pay cases—meaning that only about …

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.

Compulsory Employment Arbitration And The Eeoc, Richard A. Bales

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 …

Employment Discrimination Decisions From The October 2008 Term, Drew S. Days Iii

Touro Law Review

Several employment discrimination decisions were handed down this Term. They were Ricci v.DeStefano (Title VII); Gross v.FBL Financial Services, Inc. (Age Discrimination in Employment Act); AT & T Corp. v. Hulteen (Pregnancy Discrimination Act); and 14 Penn Plaza L.L. C. v. Pyett, which concerned the impact of arbitration agreements upon the reach of federal employment discrimination laws.

Intellectual Property And Employee Selection, Elizabeth A. Rowe

Elizabeth A Rowe

In today’s marketplace, companies from Disney to Hooters are increasingly integrating their image into the service that they provide. This has come to be known as “branded service.” The human wearing the trade dress merges with the brand image. When a company chooses this strategy to differentiate itself from its competitors in the marketplace, it will often incorporate some intellectual property, and the result then necessarily influences hiring decisions. If a business decides not to hire a prospective employee because she does not fit the company’s image, and that decision is challenged under the antidiscrimination laws, to what extent should …

The Glass Mirror: Appearance-Based Discrimination In The Workplace, Enbar Toledano

Enbar Toledano

The benefits of physical attractiveness are considerable and widespread. As early as infancy and throughout their lifetimes, physically attractive individuals are afforded more favorable treatment, are assumed to possess more socially desirable traits, and enjoy better opportunities in virtually every aspect of life. Perhaps most troubling are the professional advantages enjoyed by attractive job candidates and employees. Statistically, these individuals will receive more job offers, better advancement opportunities, and higher salaries than their less attractive peers—despite numerous findings that they are no more intelligent or capable. Given the proven and arguably undeserved disparities in professional treatment between the unattractive and …

Unmasking A Pretext For Res Ipsa Loquitur: A Proposal To Let Employment Discrimination Speak For Itself, Bill Corbett

William R. Corbett

Unmasking a Pretext for Res Ipsa Loquitur: A Proposal to Let Employment Discrimination Speak for Itself

William R. Corbett*

Has too much tort law been incorporated into the case law under the federal employment discrimination statutes? The debate on this issue has been reinvigorated by the Supreme Court’s decision in Staub v. Proctor Hospital, 131 S. Ct. 1186 (2011). In Staub the Court referred to the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, a federal employment discrimination statute, as a “federal tort.” The Court then adopted the tort doctrine of proximate cause as the standard for evaluating subordinate bias (or …

Class Actions, Heightened Commonality, And Declining Access To Justice, A. Benjamin Spencer

A. Benjamin Spencer

A prerequisite to being certified as a class under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is that there are “questions of law or fact common to the class.” Although this “commonality” requirement had heretofore been regarded as something that was easily satisfied, in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes the Supreme Court gave it new vitality by reading into it an obligation to identify among the class a common injury and common questions that are “central” to the dispute. Not only is such a reading of Rule 23’s commonality requirement unsupported by the text of the rule, but …

Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Employment Discrimination As A Means For Social Cleansing, E. Gary Spitko

Faculty Publications

In December 2010, President Barack Obama signed into law the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal Act of 2010,” which provided for repeal of the policy prohibiting gay people from serving openly in the military, after consideration of a Department of Defense review on the implementation of such a repeal. This article examines the history of the exclusion of openly gay people from military service in the United States from the early twentieth century up until the time of the repeal. The author concludes from this review that the dominant purpose of the military’s exclusion of openly gay people was to …

Do Law Schools Mistreat Women Faculty? Or, Who’S Afraid Of Virginia Woolf?, Dan Subotnik

Dan Subotnik

No abstract provided.

Undocumented Workers: Crossing The Borders Of Immigration And Workplace Law, Kati L. Griffith

Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy

No abstract provided.

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.

The Pro-Employee Bent Of The Roberts Court, Lisa D. Taylor

Lisa D Taylor

A surprising yet readily discernible trend is emerging from recent United States Supreme Court decisions – a trend favoring the rights of individual employees in cases requiring interpretation of federal employment statutes. Though marquee employment-context cases like Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes may be touted as exemplifying the pro-business tendencies of the Roberts Court, a closer and more comprehensive look suggests that the Court does not favor business interests at all, at least in the workplace. Indeed, the relative dark-horses of the Court’s last Term suggest the opposite – all three of the Court’s most recent decisions interpreting federal employment …

The Gender Bind: Men As Inauthentic Caregivers, Kelli K. Garcia

Kelli K. Garcia

Almost 20 years after the enactment of the Family and Medical Leave Act, an ostensibly gender neutral statute, companies are still less likely to offer paternity leave than they are to offer maternity leave. Although women have traditionally faced discrimination in the workplace because they are viewed as inauthentic workers—not fully committed to paid employment—men face the corresponding problem and are viewed as inauthentic caregivers. Men who seek family leave transgress gender norms and risk workplace discrimination and stereotyping. This paper seeks to make explicit how the social and cultural contexts in which the FMLA is applied interact to maintain …

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 …

A Religious Organization’S Autonomy In Matters Of Self-Governance: Hosanna-Tabor And The First Amendment, Carl H. Esbeck

Faculty Publications

In Hosanna-Tabor, a teacher suing her employer, a church-based school, alleged retaliation for having asserted rights under a discrimination statute. The School raised the “ministerial exception,” which prohibits ministers from suing their religious employer. The Court held the exception was constitutionally required. Before giving the facts that convinced it that this teacher was a “minister,” the Court had to distinguish the leading case of Employ. Div. v. Smith. Plaintiffs in Smith held jobs as counselors at a drug rehabilitation center. They were fired for illegal drug use (peyote), and later denied unemployment compensation. The Native American Church ingests peyote during …

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.

The Sex Stereotyping Prohibition At Work, Kimberly A. Yuracko

Kimberly Yuracko

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 …

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.

Federal Courts At The Boyd School Of Law, Anne R. Traum

Scholarly Works

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 …

Place Aux Dames: The Ideological Divide Between U.S. And European Gender Discrimination Laws, Jens Dammann

Cornell International Law Journal

The United States and the European Union are both firmly committed to eliminating gender discrimination. However, as I show in this Article, they have adopted fundamentally different strategies in pursuing this objective: Whereas the United States offers plaintiffs much more generous procedural rules and far more powerful remedies, the European Union relies on more comprehensive substantive prohibitions against discrimination. What lies behind these different approaches? Contrary to existing scholarship, which emphasizes path dependence arguments, I argue that differences between gender discrimination laws in the United States and Europe can best be understood as the result of a fundamental ideological divide. …

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 …

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 …