The plaintiff was a salesperson at a Prada store, was fired, and has sued Prada for violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and also 42 U.S.C. § 1981. The suit charges, under both statutes, discrimination and retaliation. The district judge dismissed the suit for failure to state a claim.

The principal issue is the meaning of "race" in section 1981, which provides, so far a

The plaintiff, Deborah Prechtel, appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment to the defendant, Kellogg's, doing business as Kellogg's Snacks, on Prechtel's state-law claims of sex-based discrimination, retaliation, and unequal pay. The district court held that the plaintiff failed to adduce any evidence to establish a genuine issue of material fact regarding the claims raised in her

Plaintiff-Appellant Debbie Almontaser appeals the December 5, 2007 order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Stein, J.), denying her motion for a preliminary injunction. We affirm the order.

BACKGROUND

From 2005 to 2007, Almontaser, an Arab-American, has led the development of the Khalil Gibran International Academy ("KGIA"), a New York City pu

Kurt Vroman, a union official for the Volusia County Fire Department, sued Volusia County, James Tauber, James Willits and Terry Moore for firing him in violation of his First Amendment rights in retaliation for leading a no-confidence vote against Fire Chief Jim Tauber in 2004.

Defendants denied wrongdoing.

While delivering a licensing notice to a kennel business, Denver business license inspector Richard Berney physically assaulted Reed Williams and Marcy Albin, co-owners of the business. Williams and Albin sued Berney and his employer, the City and County of Denver, alleging the assaults violated their procedural and substantive due process rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. They also alleged stat

Rsushan Ashanti-Alexander sued his employer Independent School District No 1 of Tulsa County, Oklahoma on civil rights, 42 U.S.C. 2000e, and retaliation theories claiming that the school system discriminated against him for after he challenged the accuracy of test score reports and then retaliated against him for doing so by reassigning him from his long held position as principal of the Madison M

Lola Ann Brannum appeals from a grant of summary judgment in favor of her employer, the Missouri Department of Corrections (MDOC), on her retaliation claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. The district court2 held that Brannum failed to establish a prima facie case of retaliation and, furthermore, that Brannum did not prove MDOC's proffered reasons fo

The Plaintiff, Sharon R. Baker ("Baker"), brings this action against her former employer, EchoStar Communications Corporation; EchoSphere, L.L.C.; and EchoStar Satellite, L.L.C. ("EchoStar"), to remedy: (1) hostile work environment sexual harassment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. (Title VII); (2) gender discrimination by EchoSt

Plaintiff claimed denial of rights claim under the FMLA, a retaliation claim under the FMLA, retaliation for a future filing of a worker's compensation claim, and a breach of an implied contract. Defendant's Rule 50 motion was granted on the retaliation for a future filing of a worker's compensation claim because as of the date of firing the plaintiff has not yet actually filed the worker's compe

In Reno v. Baird (1998) 18 Cal.4th 640 (Reno), we held that, although an employer may be held liable for discrimination under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.),1 nonemployer individuals are not personally liable for that discrimination. In this case, we must decide whether the FEHA makes individuals personally liable for retaliation. We conclud

Appellant Marcellus Baker sued his former employer, Via Christi Medical Center, for racial discrimination, sexual harassment, and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The United States District Court for the District of Kansas granted summary judgment to Via Christi. Mr. Baker appeals pro se, generally arguing that he is entitled to a jury determination on the merits o

Plaintiff-Appellant Pamela Fye appeals the District Court's entry of summary judgment in favor of Defendant-Appellee Oklahoma Corporation Commission ("OCC") on her claim of retaliatory discharge under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and its denial of her motion for reconsideration of that issue. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and AFFIRM.

Plaintiff, Robert Karas, filed a complaint on behalf of his minor son, Benjamin Karas, alleging that Benjamin was injured while playing in an organized ice hockey game when he was bodychecked from behind by two opposing players. The complaint alleged that the opposing players' conduct was willful and wanton, and further alleged that the opposing players' team, the governing association of the

Plaintiff, Joseph Malloy, appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant Postmaster General of the United States Post Office ("Post Office"), on his claims of reverse gender discrimination, age discrimination, retaliation in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and his combined claim of har

Cynthia Lambert appeals the district court's dismissal of her complaint against Greg Hartmann in his official capacity as the Hamilton County Clerk of Courts (the "Clerk") and against the Hamilton County Board of County Commissioners (the "County") (collectively the "Defendants"). In September of 2003, Lambert received a traffic citation for speeding. She later discovered that this citation, w

1 In this accelerated appeal under the Oklahoma Administrative Procedures Act (OAPA), 75 O.S.2001 & Supp. 2007 §§ 250 through 323, Appellant, Retha C. Klopfenstein, seeks review of the trial court's dismissal for want of jurisdiction of her petition seeking review of an administrative agency order. After reviewing the facts and the law, we reverse and remand.

BACKGROUND

2 Appellant is

After five years of litigation in the superior court, district court, and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, a jury awarded appellant Robert Chavez $11,500 in a statutory retaliation action brought against his employer and a supervisor. Chavez then filed a motion seeking approximately $871,000 in attorney fees under the fee provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Government Code

The plaintiffs in this employment discrimination case brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and 42 U.S.C. § 1981, are seven employees and two former employees of Coca-Cola Bottling Co. Consolidated ("CCBCC"). In their complaint, they allege that CCBCC is maintaining a "pattern or practice" of discrimination against them and all other similarly sit

In this employment discrimination case, plaintiff Sonja J. Palmer, appearing pro se, appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant Denver Health and Hospital Authority. Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm.

Plaintiff is a former employee of defendant Denver Health and Hospital Authority, and she filed suit against defendant under Title

Plaintiff Ron Hubbard appeals from an order of the district court granting summary judgment to defendant United Services Automobile Association (USAA) on his federal and common law claims of employment discrimination and retaliation. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

Mr. Hubbard, a white male born in August 1951, was an employee of USAA from 1991 until mid-2004, whe

Deborah Steele appeals from the district court's order granting summary judgment for defendant on her claims for sex discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17; age discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-34 (ADEA); retaliation in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a); and retaliat

Richard B. Luke (Luke) appeals from a summary judgment in favor of Collotype Labels USA, Inc. (Collotype). Luke brought the underlying action for wrongful termination in violation of public policy against Collotype. The trial court granted Collotype's motion for summary judgment on the basis that Luke's claims were preempted by the National Labor Relations Act1 (NLRA). We affirm.

II.

After the California Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS)1 rendered its adverse findings, senior information systems analyst supervisor Gary Trobee (plaintiff) continued to prosecute his whistleblower claim (Gov. Code, § 8547.3; Lab. Code, § 1102.5) without challenging those findings by mandamus.

He contends he has the right to pursue a civil action for damages once the State Pers

Kevin Culton filed a Title VII suit against his employer, the Missouri Department of Corrections ("the Department"), alleging that the Department retaliated against him for confronting a supervisor about the supervisor's unwanted sexual advances toward a subordinate employee. The district court2 granted the Department's motion for summary judgment on all of Culton's claims. Culton appeals part

Carol Skare sued her former employer, Extendicare Health Services, Inc. (Extendicare), under the Minnesota whistleblower statute, alleging retaliation for her reporting violations of various laws, regulations, and company policies. The district court1 granted Extendicare's motion for summary judgment, and Skare appeals. Extendicare filed a cross appeal to challenge the determination that a gen