The Chicago Tribune reports that U.S. District Judge Edward Chen in the Northern District of California, has certified a class comprising of women employees of Costco holding that such a class meets the requirements the Supreme Court stated in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Betty Dukes, et al., 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011) regarding class certification in Rule 23.
0 Comments
The Chicago Tribune reports that a Colorado resident has won a $7.2 million judgment against a Central Illinois microwavable popcorn manufacturer and distributors of the product. This product liability action resembles the litigation over mesothelioma due to asbestos from the 1960s and on. In this case, the chemical in the fake butter in microwavable popcorn has led to a serious lung issue in one user who consumed massive quantities of the product.
The ISBA reports today that a recent Seventh Circuit Decision in Bell v. Chicago Police Chief Keating, No. 11-2408 (September 10, 2012) has threatened a Chicago Municipal Code Ordinance, Section 8-4-010(d), which prohibits acts of disorderly conduct when individual knowingly fails to obey lawful police order under circumstances where three or more other persons are committing acts of disorderly conduct in immediate vicinity, and where said acts are likely to cause substantial harm or serious inconvenience, annoyance or alarm. The plaintiffs alleged that the Ordinance violated their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The District Court ruled that the plaintiff's lacked standing to bring a facial Constitutional challenge to the ordinance. The Seventh Circuit reversed the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division and concluded that there was standing.
The Chicago Tribune reports that, in the face of a federal discrimination lawsuit, the IHSA has changed their policy to allow disabled athletes to participate in some competitions.
The IHSA also created three events specifically for athletes with various disabilities. With the backing of the Illinois Attorney General, one student, Mary Kate Callahan, 17, has filed suit against the IHSA alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Federal Rehabilitation Act. Early settlement talks were unsuccessful. If you are a person with various accessibility needs and you feel that your are being discriminated against by anyone, contact an attorney to discuss whether the law provides a remedy that you can seek in court. Each title of the ADA provides specific and general rights, privileges, powers, and protections and a litigation or transactional attorney can help you enforce your rights or draft agreements to protect and clarify rights or obligations under the ADA. The Seventh Circuit, on September 7, overturned a Northern District of IL decision awarding summary judgment to United Airlines over their policy of placing disabled employees in vacant positions only when a more qualified candidate was not available.
In EEOC v. United Airlines, Inc., 11-cv-1774, the EEOC alleged, and the Seventh Circuit agreed, that United Airlines violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by failing to immediately assign disabled employees who required reasonable accommodations to vacant positions as long as they are qualified for those positions and that placing the employees in such positions did not present an undue hardship to the employer. Debt collectors are getting even more aggressive in the wake of the Great Financial Collapse of 2008. As more and more Americans lose their jobs, homes, and livelihoods, debt collectors have expanded their "playbook" to collect on the debts created by the moribund economic state.
The Chicago Tribune has posted an article describing the aggressive, and often illegal, tactics that debt collectors have employed since 2008. Some states, such as California, are pushing back through lawsuits, both public and private, as well as proposed new state laws to counter some of the more egregious tactics, including harassing phone calls, intimidation, and a flood of lawsuits where they mostly obtain judgments by default and seek to enforce their judgments by freezing assets or garnishing wages (if any). A jury awarded a University of Michigan student $4.5 million based on the actions of a former Michigan assistant attorney general who wrote negatively about the student on his personal blog.
You know the old saying, an attorney who represents himself has a fool for a client. Well, the foolish former assistant attorney general represented himself and stubbornly went down with his own ship. Relying entirely on a First Amendment defense, he refused to accept a settlement offer to apologize and retract his comments that the student used alcohol to entire minors to have sex with him. Employment litigation can often enter the news when it involves salacious or outrageous details, but newsworthy or not, not every employment dispute can be resolved through litigation. Retaliatory discharge (or demotion) claims can often be messy, but employers are not allowed under Federal and Illinois law to retaliate against employees for protected conduct. Employers can insulate themselves from liability by developing procedures and documentation. We can discuss with any size company measures that protect everyone from potential harm.
The anti-retaliation provision of Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII") prohibits an employer from "discriminat[ing] against any of his employees . . . because he has made a charge" under Title VII. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a). Title VII allows "a person claiming to be aggrieved" to file a charge with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "EEOC") alleging that the employer committed an unlawful employment practice, and, if the EEOC declines to sue the employer, the statute permits a civil lawsuit to "be brought . . . by the person claiming to be aggrieved . . . by the alleged unlawful employment practice." 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5 (b), (f)(1). |
AuthorRishi Nair owns Nair Law LLC and practices as Of Counsel at Keener and Associates, P.C. Archives
October 2013
Categories
All
|
|