Labor and Employment Law Commons^™

If You Love Me Dear, Please Sign Here: Will The "Love Contract" Play A Role In Protecting Employers From Sexual Harassment Liability?, 40 J. Marshall L. Rev. 311 (2006), Jessica Lynn Mok O'Neill

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

What's Up On Stock-Drops? Moench Revisited, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 605 (2006), Craig C. Martin, Matthew J. Renaud, Omar R. Akbar

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Disparate Impact And The Adea: So, Who Is Going To Be In The Comparison Group?, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1475 (2006), Timothy Tommaso

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Learning From Wal-Mart, Melissa Hart

Publications

This article considers the landmark gender discrimination class action, Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, both as a prototype of an emerging litigation strategy and also as a case that is entirely unique. As part of a growing trend of gender discrimination class claims, Dukes has the potential to push the boundaries of the law to confront the pervasive, tenacious stereotypes that continue to limit women's workplace opportunities. The plaintiffs' arguments - both the narrative of discrimination their evidence set out and the legal strategies they chose - are strikingly similar to claims that have been made in many class action …

Breaking The Bank: Revisiting Central Bank Of Denver After Enron And Sarbanes-Oxley, Celia Taylor

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Erisa: State Regulation Of Insured Plans After Davila, 38 J. Marshall. L. Rev. 693 (2005), Donald T. Bogan

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Follow The Money: Erisa Plan Investments In Mutual Funds And Insurance, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 867 (2005), Nell Hennessy

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

"Who's The Boss?": An Analytical And Practical Approach To Determine The "Employer" In A Defined Contribution Qualified Retirement Plan, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1011 (2005), Megan Mccoy

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rules Of Or Substantive Law: Who Controls An Individual's Right To Choose A Lawyer In Today's Corporate Environment, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1265 (2005), Joan Colson

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Remands In Trade Adjustment Assistance Cases, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 9 (2005), Munford Page Hall Ii

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Erisa Stock Drop Cases: An Evolving Standard, 38 J. Marshall L. Rev. 889 (2005), Craig C. Martin, Elizabeth L. Fine

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Mitigation And The Americans With Disabilities Act, Jill Elaine Hasday

Michigan Law Review

It is an open question whether the prohibition on employment discrimination in the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) protects plaintiffs who have not attempted to mitigate the effect of their disability on their ability to work. Suppose, for example, that a job applicant has severely impaired vision because of a corneal disease. He can have corneal transplant surgery that his doctors recommend and expect will allow him to see much more clearly, but he does not want to have the surgery because of the complications sometimes associated with the operation and the possibility that the surgery will not work. He …

Family Leave Policies Trump States Rights: Nevada Department Of Human Resources V. Hibbs And Its Impact Of Sovereign Immunity Jurisprudence, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 599 (2004), Jana L. Tibben

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Erisa: Re-Thinking Firestone In Light Of Great-West - Implications For Standard Of Review And The Right To A Jury Trial In Welfare Benefit Claims, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 629 (2004), Donald T. Bogan

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Paradox Of The Misuse Of Administrative Law In Erisa Benefit Claims, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 727 (2004), Mark D. Debofsky

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Cash Balance Plan: An Integral Component Of The Defined Benefit Plan Renaissance, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 753 (2004), Barry Kozak

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Counting The Cash: Disclosure And Cash Balance Plans, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 849 (2004), Dana M. Muir

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Need For A Ceasefire In The War On The Workers: Restoring The Balance And Hope Of The National Labor Relations Act, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 925 (2004), Mary Ann Leuthner

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Insulin-Dependent Diabetes And Access To Treatment In The Workplace: The Failure Of The Americans With Disabilities Act To Provide Protection, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 957 (2004), Margaret C. Mcgrath

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Retaliation Against Third Parties: A Potential Loophole In Title Vii's Discrimination Protection, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1313 (2004), Anita G. Schausten

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Will Employment Discrimination Class Actions Survive?, Melissa Hart

Publications

Recent years have witnessed increasing attacks on the appropriateness of certification of employment discrimination class action claims. The shift is often attributed to amendments to federal antidiscrimination laws in the Civil Rights Act of 1991. This paper argues, however, that the changes wrought by the 1991 amendments need not pose a barrier to resolution of employment discrimination claims through class litigation. The addition of compensatory and punitive damages and a jury-trial right may increase the level of scrutiny and perhaps the level of judicial involvement necessary in an employment discrimination class action. But they do not render such a class …

Disparate Impact Theory In Employment Discrimination: What’S Griggs Still Good For? What Not?, Elaine W. Shoben

Scholarly Works

Is disparate impact a dead theory of employment discrimination? Definitely not. The theory itself has a more stable legal status than it did when the Supreme Court embraced it in its 1971 opinion Griggs v. Duke Power Co. But is it thriving in litigation? It appears to be neither thriving nor dead. It has become a relatively less vital tool, compared with theories of intentional discrimination. Despite the heroic effort of Congress to keep the theory from destruction by the Supreme Court through its express codification in 1991, disparate impact litigation is not making a major impact in this …

Employer Tros Are All The Rage: A New Approach To Workplace Violence, Kyle Riley

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Illinois Construction Negligence, Post-Structural Work Act: The Need For A Clear Legislative Mandate, 36 J. Marshall L. Rev. 531 (2003), Peter Puchalski

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Role Of Workplace Culture Evidence In Hostile Workplace Environment Sexual Harassment Litigation: Does Title Vii Mean New Management Or Just Business As Usual?, Christopher Massaro

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Musical Courts: Plaintiff Picks A Court But Can Defendant Trump The Choice? An Analysis Of Breuer V. Jim's Concrete Of Brevard, Inc., Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case Brewer v. Jim's Concrete of Brevard, 538 U.S. 691 (2003). The author expected the Court to address the issue of whether the language of the Fair Labor Standards Act providing that "an action . . . may be maintained in any federal or state court" constitutes an express provision prohibiting removal to federal court when the plaintiff has chosen to maintain its lawsuit in state court.

How Employment-Discrimination Plaintiffs Fare In The Federal Courts Of Appeals, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg, Stewart J. Schwab

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Employment-discrimination plaintiffs swim against the tide. Compared to the typical plaintiff, they win a lower proportion of cases during pretrial and after trial. Then, many of their successful cases are appealed. On appeal, they have a harder time in upholding their successes, as well in reversing adverse outcome.

This tough story does not describe some tiny corner of the litigation world. Employment-discrimination cases constitute an increasing fraction of the federal civil docket, now reigning as the largest single category of cases at nearly 10 percent.

In this article, we use official government data to describe the appellate phase of this …

Mixed Up About Mixed Motive: What Will Trigger A "Mixed Motive" Analysis In Title Vii Cases? An Analysis Of Desert Palace, Inc. V. Costa, Barbara J. Fick

Journal Articles

This article previews the Supreme Court case Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa, 539 U.S. 90, 2003. The author expected the Court to clarify and define the circumstances in which it is appropriate to use the "mixed-motive model" to prove a violation of Title VII under the disparate treatment theory.

David Feller, Senior Partner, Michael H. Gottesman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

While in law school, in the late 1950's, I decided that I wanted a career in labor law, representing unions. I asked my labor law professor what firms I should consider. He told me there was one firm nationwide that stood out from all the rest: Goldberg, Feller and Bredhoff. He warned, though, that the firm was very small, and the chances of getting a job there remote. I did some research and discovered that the firm had only four lawyers: three partners (Arthur Goldberg, Dave Feller, and Elliot Bredhoft), and one associate (Jerry Anker). The firm was General Counsel …

Litigation Narratives: Why Jensen V. Ellerth Didn't Change Sexual Harassment Law, But Still Has A Story Worth Telling, Melissa Hart

Publications

No abstract provided.