This is a Title VII suit for sexual harassment and retaliation. Priscilla Huston appeals from a grant of summary judgment in favor of her former employer, Procter & Gamble Paper Products Corporation (P&G). Huston’s appeal hinges on whether two P&G employees qualify as “management level” so that their knowledge may be imputed to P&G for purposes of liability under Title VII. The United States

On August 28, 2002, defendant Archstone Smith, Inc. (“Archstone”) terminated plaintiff W. Michael Rzepiennik’s employment. On June 13, 2007, he brought this action against Archstone, asserting a claim pursuant to the employee protection provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1514A (“SOX claim”), as well as a state law claim for breach of contract. The district court dismissed

The sole issue raised in this rehearing en banc is whether § 704(a) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a), creates a cause of action for third-party retaliation for persons who have not personally engaged in protected activity. After applying the plain and unambiguous statutory text, we join the Third, Fifth, and Eighth Circuit Courts of Appeal in holding that the

Appellants Robert G. Franklin (Franklin), Glenn E. Steele (Steele), Edward W. Lewis (Lewis), Darryl Bailey (Bailey), and Leon Booker (Booker) (collectively, Appellants) are African-American current or former members of Local 2 of the Sheet Metal Workers International Association (Local 2). Appellants filed a civil rights action against Local 2, alleging (1) racial discrimination in job placement u

Fearful that its insurer, National Casualty Corporation (“NCC”), would surreptitiously control its defense in a way that would preclude coverage under the insurance policy, Forge declined to accept insurer-appointed counsel to defend it against claims brought before the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (“EEOC”). The parties then filed cross-claims for declaratory judgment seeking to

For nine years, the City of Mt. Vernon allowed police officers who missed their weekend work shifts to attend National Guard duties to make up the time on their scheduled days off. The City provided no comparable scheduling benefit to non-Guard employees who missed work for other, non-military activities. This appeal presents the question of whether, under the Uniformed Services Employment and Ree

Plaintiff Sharon Lucero taught English to 12th grade students during the 2003-04 school year. In the summer of 2004, she was assigned to teach English to 7th graders instead. Following her reassignment, Lucero filed discrimination charges against her school system, its administrators, and members of the school board of trustees. Lucero brought eleven separate claims. The district court granted sum

Diane Redvanly appeals from a jury verdict of no cause of action in her Conscientious Employee Protection Act (CEPA) claim against her former employer, Automated Data Processing, Inc. (ADP), and her supervisor, ADP Vice President Richard Feeney. Redvanly contends that evidence of her cessation of employment with a prior employer, NYNEX Mobile Communications, Inc. (NYNEX) was inadmissible,

Plaintiffs-Appellants Rondigo, L.L.C., Delores Michaels, Ronald Michaels, and King of the Winds, Inc. (collectively, “Rondigo”) appeal the order of the district court granting summary judgment in favor of Defendant-Appellee Casco Township (“Casco” or “the Township”) in this § 1983 action. After Casco failed to approve Rondigo’s applications to operate a composting facility in Casco,

Plaintiff/Appellant William Sanford (“Sanford”) appeals the order of the district court granting summary judgment to Defendants/Appellees Main Street Baptist Church Manor (“Manor”) and Southeastern Management Center, Inc. (“Southeastern”) (collectively, “Defendants”) on Sanford’s claims of hostile environment sexual harassment, quid pro quo sexual harassment, and retaliation, pur

After being fired from defendant Elmwood Cemetery, plaintiff Silvia Thomas was dropped from her health insurance company’s coverage. Thomas initially sued Elmwood and defendant Chancey Miller, her former supervisor at Elmwood, for failing to notify her of her right to continue health insurance under the Consolidated Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA), 29 U.S.C. § 1160 et seq. She allege

The Iota Xi Chapter of Sigma Chi Fraternity (the "Chapter") and two of its officers, Ryan Duckwitz and Justin Pietro, sued George Mason University (the "University") and several of its administrators1 in the Eastern District of Virginia, alleging, inter alia, constitutional claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Chapter and certain of its members were sanctioned by the University following their invo

Alegria Olivarez sued her former employer, the University of Texas at Austin (UT-Austin), alleging discrimination based on national origin and retaliation. See Tex. Lab. Code Ann. §§ 21.051, .055, .110 (West 2006). UT-Austin filed a plea to the jurisdiction asserting that Olivarez's suit was barred because she did not file an administrative complaint with the Texas Commission on Human Rights (T

The record satisfies us that there is no genuine issue of material fact for trial. We review grants of summary judgment de novo. Okmyansky v. Herbalife Int’l of America, Inc., 415 F.3d 154, 158 (1st Cir. 2005).

It is the plaintiff’s burden to show that material questions of fact exist. See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322, 324 (1986). To do so in this matter, the pl

This appeal arises from a complaint filed by David Meuser ("Meuser/Appellant") against Federal Express Corporation ("FedEx") on February 9, 2006, in the Hampshire Superior Court, in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, alleging violation of the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act (“MCRA”), Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 149, § 52C, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and discharge in violation of pub

This appeal presents the question of whether the patronage dismissal doctrine immunizes public employers who terminate employees on the basis of perceived lack of personal loyalty. We conclude that it does not and remand for further proceedings.

I

Kathleen Nichols worked for the Washoe County School District for nine years, her last six as an administrative assistant to the General C

This appeal presents the question whether reports by compliance inspectors of a water and sewer department that “owe[ their] existence” to investigative duties assigned to the inspectors are protected by the First Amendment from managerial discipline. Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410, 421, 126 S. Ct. 1951, 1960 (2006). Daisy Abdur-Rahman and Ryan Petty, inspectors formerly employed by the De

Respondent Javaid Iqbal is a citizen of Pakistan and aMuslim. In the wake of the September 11, 2001, terroristattacks he was arrested in the United States on criminal charges and detained by federal officials. Respondentclaims he was deprived of various constitutional protections while in federal custody. To redress the allegeddeprivations, respondent filed a complaint against numerous federal off

Donna J. Nealey appeals the district court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of her former employer, Water District No. 1 of Johnson County, Kansas (WaterOne), on her claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12101-12213; the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634; and the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), 29 U.S.C. § 2601-54. Review

James L. Bolden bought two properties in Topeka, Kansas, at a tax sale. The City of Topeka found the structures located on these properties unfit for human habitation, and demolished them. In this action Mr. Bolden seeks damages for the demolitions, charging that the City’s actions deprived him of property rights protected by substantive due process. The district court held a bench trial on his

Plaintiff brought this action against her former employer, the Oregon Department of Corrections (DOC), alleging, among other things, discriminatory treatment based on her gender, ORS 659A.030;(1) retaliation for having lodged a gender discrimination complaint, ORS 659A.865;(2) and intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED). Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the

Plaintiff, a longshore worker, appeals the trial court's dismissal, on summary judgment, of his wrongful discharge claim against his former employer, a ship repair yard. Plaintiff contends that the trial court erred in determining that plaintiff's common-law claim for wrongful discharge was displaced by the existence of an adequate statutory remedy afforded to workers under section 49 of the Long

¶1 Robert Howell and Pete Hodap bring separate appeals related to a civil suit alleging multiple constitutional and tort violations arising out of the execution of a search warrant. Patti Howell and Randy Johnson submit cross-appeals. For the following reasons and those set forth in the simultaneously filed memorandum decision,1 we affirm in part and reverse in part.

I.

¶2 On W

Carmine Scotch sued his former employer, the Art Institute of California-Orange County, Inc. (AIC), under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, Government Code section 12900 et seq. (FEHA),1 alleging discrimination based on disability. Scotch alleged AIC violated the FEHA by reducing his employment status to part time because he was HIV-positive, failing to make a reasonable accommodatio

Axxis Network & Telecommunications, Inc. (Axxis) appeals from the court’s order denying its petition to compel arbitration of former employees’ claims that they had not been paid the prevailing wage rate for work performed on projects for the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) as required by Labor Code section 1770 et seq. governing public works projects. We agree with the trial court