Business Labor Employment Law Insurance Attorneys Portsmouth New Hampshire NH Lawyers

News

Business Insurance Litigation Personal Injury Labor

Case Summaries

Labor & Employment Law

[08/20] Hurlic v. S. California Gas Co.
In a suit against defendant-company and its pension plan alleging that company's amendment of the plan violated both ERISA and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), dismissal of the lawsuit is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded where: 1) pension plans utilizing a so-called cash balance formula (cash balance plans) do not violate an anti-age discrimination provision of ERISA; 2) cash balance plans do not violate one of ERISA's "anti-backloading" provisions; 3) ERISA preempts plaintiffs' state law FEHA claim; but 4) plaintiffs' complaint adequately alleged that defendants violated ERISA's notice requirement.

[08/20] Prescott v. Higgins
In a claim of racial discrimination against defendant city, grant of summary judgment for defendants, denial of plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment, and denial of motion to alter or amend the judgment are affirmed over claims of error that: 1) selection criteria used by defendant resulted in a less than eighty percent success rate for African-American applications; 2) the selection criteria have had a disparate impact on African-American applicants; and 3) plaintiff was not compensated for serving as Acting General Foreman in 2002 when the then-General Foreman was out on sick-leave.

[08/20] Soto-Lebron v. Federal Express Corp.
In a matter brought by former employee against defendant FedEx following his termination, grant of FedEx's motion for judgment as a matter of law on the slander and libel claims is affirmed where: 1) the evidence introduced in support of the slander claim "does not rise to more than informal rumors" circulating among employees, for which FedEx cannot be held liable; and 2) there was sufficient evidence to support liability for libel. Case is remanded for new trial on damages for the libel claim where admission of irrelevant evidence tainted the jury's damage calculation and that taint was not cured by remittitur. Denial of defendant's motion for judgment as a matter of law on the intentional infliction of emotional distress claim is reversed where former employee-plaintiff did not introduce any evidence suggesting that a subsequent employer or potential employer treated him adversely as a result of the defamatory statements made by FedEx.

[08/20] Henry v. Milwaukee County
In a Title VII suit alleging sex discrimination and retaliation by defendant-employer for its policy of assigning some correction officers' shifts in single-sex juvenile detention facilities on the basis of sex, judgment for defendant is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) sex-based assignments weren't reasonably necessary to achieve the facility's goals of privacy, security, and rehabilitation, and therefore an officer's sex could not be considered a bona fide occupational qualification that would except defendant from the requirements of Title VII; but 2) plaintiffs had not proven their harassment or retaliation claims.

[08/20] Buckley v. Mukasey
In an action under Title VII claiming race discrimination, sex discrimination, and retaliation stemming from plaintiff's employment as a special agent with the Drug Enforcement Administration, judgment as a matter of law for the government is vacated and remanded where: 1) district court's ruling on certain class action litigation evidence constituted an error of law and thus, an abuse of discretion; 2) the court erred in granting the government's Rule 50 motion on a failure-to-promote retaliation claim; and 3) plaintiff was entitled to a new trial on the claims that were, and which should have been, submitted to the jury in a 2006 trial.

More...

Legal News

News

Business

Insurance

Litigation

Personal Injury

Labor

Case Summaries

Labor & Employment Law