The Fifth Circuit reversed a grant of summary judgment in Lindsley v. TRT Holdings, Inc., No. 20-10263 (5th Cir. 1/7/2021). In an opinion written by Judge Ho, the court found that the plaintiff showed that she was paid much less than similarly situated male employees of Onmi hotels. The lower court had found that
Clients and potential clients often ask me at some point what is the value of his/her case? What little they know of its value is colored by the ubiquitous Personal Injury lawyer ads. Or, sometimes, their knowledge is influenced by what some brother-in-law knows, or thinks he knows. So, some clients, a small percentage, expect
Plaintiffs in employment cases often contend they are paid less than other, similarly situated co-workers. The Defendant then argues no, the plaintiff does not truly know that. Many times, the court will side with the employer and find that the employee is relying on speculation when s/he claims to “know.” Since, many plaintiffs are relying
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on sex, color, religion, race, and national (ethnic) origin. Other statutes prohibit discrimination based on age and disability. But, the statute does not apply to all businesses. An employer must have 15 or more employees for Title VII to apply. For the Age
For those of us who deal with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission regularly, that can be a lesson in futility. Like too many agencies, they are assigned too many cases and are expected to do too much with too little. So, it is not surprising that the EEOC folks do make their share of errors.
The Supreme Court must take some delight in reversing the Fifth Circuit. In a recent decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has once again reversed the Fifth Circuit. In Johnson v. City of Shelby, No. 13-1318 (5th Cir. 11/10/2014), the Supreme Court found that the Fifth Circuit applied the recent decisions
The Fifth Circuit previously overturned summary judgment in Johnson v. Maestri-Murrell Property Management, LLC, (5th Cir. 2012). I wrote about that decision here. The remarkable thing about that summary judgment was the lower court ignored direct evidence of discrimination. The district court’s decision seemed to be result-oriented. See the Fifth
Last August, Gov. Rick Perry vetoed a statute that would have amended the state version of Title VII the way Congress amended Title VII to allow women to sue for discrimination in their pay. See my posts here. The state version of Title VII is known as the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act.
The law must reflect the everyday reality of all Americans. If the law is not grounded in reality, it is no longer "the law." It becomes something oppressive. Judge Tate, a long-time judge on the Fifth Circuit, used to say that an appellate decision should make sense to a barber in Ville Platte, Louisiana. He
It was a busy day for the Supreme Court, yesterday. The high court decided a second employment case regarding retaliation cases. Congress amended Title VII in 1991 to add many new facets. It also added that to show discrimination, a plaintiff needed to show that discrimination was a "motivating factor." Did that change also