Discrimination

Subscribe to Discrimination via RSS

In Ellis v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 19060 (9th Cir. Sept. 16, 2011), the Ninth Circuit reviewed the standards for class certification in an employment class action following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dukes v. Walmart. In Ellis,three named plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, compensatory damages, and backpay on behalf of a nationwide class of female employees who the plaintiffs claimed had been denied promotion because of their gender. The district court granted class certification. In reviewing the certification order, the court provided guidance for class action litigation in the Ninth Circuit following Walmart.

The number of protected classes under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), Cal. Gov’t Code § 12900 et seq., has risen by one. The FEHA, together with the Unruh Civil Rights Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 51, currently prohibit discrimination in employment, housing, public accommodation, and services provided by business establishments on the basis of various personal characteristics such as sex, race, color, national …

Pantoja v. Anton, 198 Cal. App. 4th 87 (2011)

Lorraine Pantoja sued attorney Thomas J. Anton and his firm for wrongful termination, violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), battery, sexual battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress. By the time of the trial, only the FEHA claims remained. In their motions in limine, defendants sought to exclude any reference to the…

The plaintiff was an Australian citizen working as an associate attorney for the law firm of O’Melveny & Myers LLP on a work visa. In October 2009, Paramount extended to her a conditional offer of employment to serve as its Vice President, IT Legal, the offer being contingent upon the completion of a background investigation to Paramount’s satisfaction and the successful transfer of her work visa. The conditional offer indicated that a separate employment agreement would follow. When the plaintiff countersigned the conditional offer letter in late October, she told Paramount, for the first time, that she would not be able to start work until January 2010 because of a previously undisclosed secondment to a client of O’Melveny and because she needed to travel to Australia during the first week of January.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011)

The United States Supreme Court held that this class of as many as 1.5 million current and former female Wal-Mart employees was improperly certified by the lower court. The three lead plaintiffs claimed they were discriminated against on the basis of their gender and that Wal-Mart’s policy of providing deference to local managers’ subjective…

In Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, No. 10-277 (U.S. June 20, 2011), the Supreme Court vacated class certification of a gender discrimination lawsuit brought by 1.5 million current and former Wal-Mart employees because the plaintiffs failed to identify a specific, company-wide policy or practice of discrimination. Additionally, the Court held unanimously that the employees’ backpay claims could not be certified as a class action because Wal-Mart was entitled to individual proceedings so that it could present defenses as to each claim.

Zeinali v. Raytheon Co., 636 F.3d 544 (9th Cir. 2011)

Hossein Zeinali, who is of Iranian descent, sued Raytheon for race and national origin discrimination under the Fair Employment and Housing Act when it terminated his employment after he was denied a security clearance by the Department of Defense. The district court granted summary judgment to Raytheon, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals…

DFEH v. Lucent Technologies, Inc., 642 F.3d 728 (2011)

The California Department of Fair Employment and Housing and Steven Carauddo alleged Lucent violated the Fair Employment and Housing Act when it terminated Carauddo’s employment as an installer because he could not lift more than 30 pounds due to a back injury. The district court granted summary judgment to Lucent, and the Ninth Circuit Court…

Wills v. Superior Court, 194 Cal. App. 4th 312 (2011)

Linda Wills, who worked as a clerk for the Orange County Superior Court, was terminated from her employment after she told co-workers she was going to add them to her “Kill Bill” list and forwarded a cell phone ringtone to several people, including a co-worker, that said in a “shrieking directive”: “I’m going to…