The EEOC, despite major budget cuts and a stated goal of suing on behalf of classes or employers engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination, decided to sue on behalf of a woman fired after only 2 days on the job allegedly because she had a prosthetic leg.

The EEOC is the federal administrative agency that authorizes individuals to sue for employment discrimination matters including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (29 U.S.C. § 621-629), and the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.).

Despite passionate attempts to intervene in litigation that seems set on bringing Illinois in a growing fold of judicially sanctioned same-sex marriage states, two Illinois churches failed to meet the standards needed to intervene.  This sets the stage for Lambda Legal and the ACLU to take down the law banning state officials from issuing marriage licenses in Illinois.

As the LA Times reports, the United States Supreme Court is set to weigh in on who qualifies as a supervisor for the purposes of Title VII discrimination litigation.

Respondeat superior, or vicarious liability that employers face for their employee's torts, has always been limited to acts committed in the scope of employment in furtherance of the employer's purpose.  Here, the Supreme Court and Title VII limit the application respondeat superior to form liability for the company to supervisors. Who qualifies as a supervisor has generally been those that can hire, fire or punish.  In addition, some courts have found that those that control the day to day activities are considered supervisors. Generally those supervisors are mid-level or bottom-level managers who lack the power to hire employees.

As the LA Times article notes, the Justices were very skeptical of both expanding respondeat superior to a "day to day" supervisor and the facts of the Vance harassment claim.  It is, based on the oral arguments, not looking favorable for he Court enlarging who can victimize an employee and who is responsible for that harm.
 

The Chicago Tribune reports on a common issue among neighbors: how one can use land and what actions a neighbor can take on their neighbor's land.  As real property law is foundational, from the Court of Common Pleas in Coke's time to Learned Hand's NY jurisprudence, much of the controversies involving real property have been resolved.

After refusing to consider settlement in the case against an off-duty Chicago Police Officer who loudly used his office when threatening and eventually savagely beating Karolina Obrycka, a female bartender, the City is now willing to pay damages in exchange for limiting some very damaging precedent against the City, especially regarding tortious acts committed by its police officers.  

Two Chicago police officers who arrested a man filling up his tires at a gas station air pump were found liable for violating that man's civil rights by wrongfully arresting him.  The facts speak for themselves, but it must be noted that the Chicago Tribune observes that the City's Corporate Counsel failed to settle this case despite some very unsettling facts, including the fact the Chicago police officers changed their story regarding the Plaintiff and they both failed to appear at the aggravated battery hearing for the Plaintiff.

TMZ, courtesy of CNN, reports that a former Price is Right model has been awarded an $8.4M verdict for gender discrimination at her workplace.  The award includes over $700,000 in compensatory damages and $7.7M in punitive damages.  The model alleged in a 2010 complaint that the producers of the show