Corporate Counsel Center Labor Newsletter

LABOR CASES

U.S. 11th Circuit, May 09, 2008
McCann v. Tillman, No. 07–11743
In a Title VII suit against an employer alleging claims of racial discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment, summary judgment for employer is affirmed where: 1) the record demonstrated that employee's claims of favorable disparate treatment of similarly situated white employees were inapposite to establish a prima facie case of discrimination; 2) employee failed to meet the burden of showing that the reasons for her employer's actions were actually a pretext for retaliatory conduct; and 3) despite employee's allegations of exposure to offensive derogatory language at work, the evidence presented was insufficient to support a claim of hostile work environment. Read more...

U.S. D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, May 09, 2008
Fashion Valley Mall, LLC v. National Labor Relations Board, No. 04-1411, 05-1027, 05-1039
Mall's petition for review of a National Labor Relations Board order, which held that it was a violation of a party's free speech rights under the California Constitution to require a permit applicant to agree not to urge consumers to boycott any of the mall's tenants as a condition to obtaining a permit to engage in expressive activities at the mall, is denied where petitioner failed to raise its constitutional arguments before the circuit court in prior proceedings, and waited until it petitioned the California Supreme Court for a rehearing. Read more...

U.S. 10th Circuit, May 12, 2008
Fischer v. Forestwood Co., Inc., No. 06-4121
In an action raising claims for unlawful discharge, retaliation, and failure to hire, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed in part as to the unlawful discharge and retaliation claims, but reversed and the case remanded as to the failure to hire claim, where: 1) plaintiff was not fired since he voluntarily left the company; 2) the level of harassment plaintiff experienced because of his religion and his resignation in protest of another employee being discharged did not rise to the level of constructive discharge; 3) a taped conversation between plaintiff and the deceased president of the company constituted an admission by a party opponent and was admissible; and 4) the tapes showed sufficient evidence of a failure to hire claim to survive summary judgment. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit, May 12, 2008
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Studio Transp. Drivers Local 399, No. 06-72695
Application to enforce an NLRB order finding that a union committed an unfair labor practice against intervenor, who refused to join the union, is granted where the NLRB's interpretation of the National Labor Relations Act, in finding that the union violated the Act by offsetting its "liquidated damages" from its nonrepresentational expenses, was rational and consistent with the Act. Read more...

U.S. 10th Circuit, May 13, 2008
Dossa v. Wynne, No. 07-3284
In an action brought by plaintiff who was discharged from her civilian position at an Air Force Base, dismissal of her claims of retaliation, and gender and national origin discrimination is reversed where: 1) plaintiff exhausted her administrative remedies, and thus the district court erred in dismissing her discrimination claims; and 2) Title VII includes retaliation claims and 5 U.S.C. section 7703(b)(2) authorizes judicial review of them, and thus, the district court erred in concluding that it lacked jurisdiction over plaintiff's retaliation claim. Read more...

U.S. 6th Circuit, May 13, 2008
U.S. ex rel Marlar v. BWXT Y-12, LLC, No. 07-6051
In an action alleging violation of the the False Claims Act and discharge in retaliation for whistleblowing, dismissal of the fraud complaint is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff failed to provide sufficient detail regarding the procedures used to defraud the government; and 2) plaintiff failed to allege facts regarding a false claim presented to the government. However, dismissal of the retaliation claim is reversed and remanded where plaintiff provided sufficient information regarding the retaliatory nature of her discharge. Read more...

U.S. 7th Circuit, May 13, 2008
Knutson v. UGS Corp., No. 07-2959
In a suit brought to recover almost $700,000 in sales commissions that plaintiff claimed was due from defendants, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) two claims were time barred since the two year statute of limitations applies to written compensation plans, even though plaintiff did not have a written employment contract; and 2) plaintiff was not entitled to commission on sales of one software package since it had to be sold in conjunction with another software package and plaintiff never claimed to have been denied this commission. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit, May 13, 2008
Lawrence v. Dep't of the Interior, No. 06-35448
In an action brought by an Indian tribe member employed by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) challenging the denial of increased retirement benefits payable to employees whose duties included firefighting, summary judgment for the BIA is affirmed where: 1) the government did not waive the time limit of 5 C.F.R. section 831.906(e) by failing to provide actual notice of the new time limit for filing to current employees; 2) the federal government's trust responsibility toward Indian tribes imposes no special notice obligation beyond that enunciated in the aforementioned rule; 3) the Indian Preference Act does not apply, and the regular provisions of the Civil Service Regulations govern plaintiff as they do any other employee; and 4) summary judgment on a disparate impact claim was proper. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit, May 13, 2008
Levine v. City of Alameda, No. 06-15480, 06-15481
In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action brought by a city property manager against defendants-city and city manager alleging a due process violation stemming from his lay off, partial summary judgment for plaintiff and defendants is affirmed where the district court did not err in finding that: 1) plaintiff's procedural due process rights were violated and that he was entitled to a full evidentiary hearing before a neutral third-party; and 2) the city manager was not personally liable based on qualified immunity and the city was not liable as a municipality. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, May 13, 2008
Steele v. Youthful Offender Parole Bd., No. C053553
A judgment finding an employer liable under Fair Employment and Housing Act for retaliation against a plaintiff-employee and awarding economic damages along with attorney's fees is affirmed where: 1) substantial evidence supported a finding that plaintiff was engaged in a protected activity, subjected to adverse employment action, and that a causal link existed between plaintiff's participation as a witness and the adverse employment action; and 2) consequently , the attorney's fees award was proper. Read more...

U.S. 5th Circuit, May 14, 2008
Cruz v. State of Louisiana, No. 07-30501
Dismissal of state and federal claims of sexual discrimination against defendants is affirmed where dismissal of a federal claim due to plaintiff's failure to timely serve defendant prevented interruption of the prescriptive period in state courts against defendants from Louisiana. Read more...

U.S. 8th Circuit, May 14, 2008
Gross v. FBL Fin. Serv., Inc., No. 07-1490/1492
In an employment age discrimination action wherein the jury returned a favorable verdict for plaintiff-employee, the judgment is reversed and remanded for a new trial where: 1) the jury instructions improperly shifted the burden of persuasion in light of the absence of direct evidence that age played a substantial role in an adverse employment decision; and 2) section 2002-e-2(m) of Title VII does not apply to claims arising under the ADEA. Read more...

U.S. Fed. Circuit Court of Appeals, May 14, 2008
Springer v. Adkins, No. 2007-3180
A decision granting respondent an increased annuity payment under the Federal Employees' Retirement System (FERS) is affirmed where: 1) retirement under 5 U.S.C. section 8451 does not incorporate the age and years of service requirements of section 8412 except where explicitly stated; and 2) the FERS disability annuity provisions require that a firefighter annuitant's benefits be the greater of that which is computed under sections 8452(a) and 8415(d). Read more...

U.S. 1st Circuit, May 15, 2008
UMass Mem'l Med. Ctr., Inc. v. United Food and Commercial Workers Union, No. 07-2527, 07-2528
In an employer-union dispute wherein the district court upheld an arbitral award in favor of the union but denied the union's request for attorney fees, judgment is affirmed where: 1) the case failed to meet the exceedingly high threshold for judicial interference with arbitral awards; 2) the arbitral award drew "its essence from the collective bargaining agreement"; and 3) the district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the employer's federal claim was sufficiently justified to avoid a payment of attorney's fees. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit, May 15, 2008
Medtronic, Inc. v. White, No. 06-16229
In a contract dispute over ownership of a patent, a judgment resulting from a jury verdict in favor of defendant-doctor is reversed and remanded where both an agency jury instruction and a corroboration jury instruction were given in error, and each was prejudicial. Read more...

Supreme Court of California, May 15, 2008
In re Marriage Cases, No. S147999
In an action challenging California's ban on gay marriage, the state Supreme Court rules that the California Constitution must be interpreted to guarantee the fundamental constitutional right to form a family relationship to all Californians, whether gay or heterosexual, and to same-sex couples as well as to opposite-sex couples. The laws at issue are unconstitutional to the extent each statute reserves the designation of "marriage" exclusively to opposite-sex couples and denies same-sex couples access to that designation. The purpose underlying differential treatment of opposite-sex and same-sex couples embodied in California's current marriage statutes, the interest in retaining the traditional and well-established definition of marriage, is not a compelling state interest for purposes of the equal protection clause. Read more...

Table of Contents

LABOR CASES