National origin discrimination claim, 42 U.S.C. 2000e and retaliation claims by former East Providence, Rhode Island, city engineer Ali Khorasani who claimed that the city retaliated against him because of his Iranian ancestry.

The City of East Providence claimed that the actions taken against the plaintiff related to poor performance on his part and had nothing to do with his ancestry.

This appeal arises out of an action brought by the plaintiff, Ann Barrett, pursuant to General Statutes § 31-290a,1 against her former employer, the defendant, Hebrew Home and Hospital, Inc., alleging that the defendant wrongfully terminated her employment because, prior to her discharge, she had filed claims for workers' compensation benefits or otherwise exercised her workers' compensation

Plaintiff and appellant Danielle N. Macomber (plaintiff) filed suit against defendants and respondents Red Robin International, Inc., Morite of California, William M. Morrow, Earl Soller, Mary Lou Waite, Emerson Hess (collectively, Red Robin) and Bill Vidana for sexual harassment, gender discrimination, and retaliation under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), codified at Go

During the spring of 1998 Steven Albrechtsen, a professor in the Department of Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Coaching at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, suffered two reverses: he was told that he could not teach two particu-lar summer workshops that year (losing about $1,210 in pay), and he did not receive an $86 merit increase in his salary for the next year. He respon

This appeal from a jury verdict was brought by defendants Advanta Corp. and its wholly owned subsidiary, Advanta Mortgage Corp., U.S.A. (together, "Advanta"), with a cross-appeal by plaintiff Milton Riseman ("Riseman"). For the following reasons, we will affirm the District Court's September 7, 2001 judgment, except that we will reduce Riseman's damages under the Pennsylvania Wage Payment and

Defendant-Appellant, Trooper Kevin Kiefer, appeals the district court's denial of qualified immunity in this § 1983 action alleging that he (1) targeted the individual plaintiffs for questioning concerning their immigration status based solely upon their race or national origin in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and (2) unreasonably detained the plaintiffs' gr

This case requires us to decide whether the district court properly granted summary judgment to the defendant employer in a Title VII sexual harassment case. The lower court held that there was no basis on which to impute liability to the employer because its response to the alleged sexual harassment of the plaintiff was both prompt and effective. The district court deemed irrelevant evidence tha

In 1998, after nearly 10 years of service at Laguna Honda Hospital ("hospital") as a physician, John R. Ulrich, Jr., M.D., began protesting a decision by the San Francisco Department of Health to lay off a class of physicians at the hospital. He was not in the affected classification. Soon after, Dr. Ulrich received notice that he was being investigated by the hospital for professional incom

Plaintiff Will Tinner ("Tinner") brought an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., against his employer, United Insur-ance Company of America ("United"), for race discrimina-tion, a racially hostile working environment, retaliation, wrongful termination, and state and federal counts of con-structive disc

Martin Abrams ("Abrams") is an attorney in Illinois who alleges that his civil rights were violated when he was arrested by Illinois State Trooper Kent Walker ("Walker") when Walker was con-ducting a traffic stop in the fall of 1998. The district court granted Walker's motion for summary judgment, and Abrams appeals. We affirm.

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

While many factual issues are disput

Alisa L. Holmes appeals from a judgment reducing the damages awarded her by a jury after a trial before Judge Huck. Appellant brought the present action against her former employer, appellee West Palm Beach Housing Authority ("WPBHA"), for, inter alia, gender-based denial of a promotion (the "discrimination claim"), retaliatory termination in response to her complaints of gender bias (the "retalia

Barbara Sparr was employed by the Pulaski County Assessor's office from January, 1991, until her discharge on August 22, 2000. During her tenure with the Assessor's office the County Assessor was B.A. McIntosh. At the time of her termination, Sparr was working as an administrative assistant to McIntosh and the Chief Deputy Assessor, Janet Ward. In 2000, McIntosh chose to retire and Ward decid

Leticia Scott ("Scott"), an Asian female, was first employed by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. ("Wal-Mart"), an Arkansas corporation, in August, 1993, in its bakery department in New Llano, Louisiana. In November, 1995, she requested a transfer to Wal-Mart's "Hyper-Mart" store in Topeka, Kansas, so as to be closer to her relatives. Her request was granted. Upon her arrival in Topeka in November, 1995, she

DaimlerChrysler Corporation, formerly known as Chrysler, appeals from the judgment entered against it awarding Gerald Salitros $100,000 in punitive damages and $445,516 in front pay on his claim that Chrysler retaliated against him for exercising his rights under the Americans With Disabilities Act. Chrysler also appeals the district court's award to Salitros of $128,268.52 in attorney's fees

This is the latest in a series of frivolous appeals filed by appellants. For the reasons stated below, we conclude that this appeal is jurisdictionally defective on multiple grounds, and that it is frivolous to the point of meriting sanctions.
I. Jurisdictional defects
After the district court dismissed their complaint on April 25, 2001 for failure to comply with its Order Requiring

In this civil rights action for retaliation against the exercise of protected speech by a public employee, both municipal and individual defendants bring interlocutory appeals challenging the denial of their motions for summary judgment. We are first asked to determine whether we have jurisdiction, on interlocutory appeal, to consider the denial of defendants' motion for summary judgment on ground

Cheryl Nye sued her former employer for violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, alleging that she was dis-criminated against on the basis of sex and in retaliation for her com-plaints of discrimination.* The district court granted summary judgment to the employer finding that Nye's sexual harassment claims failed because they occurred more than 300 days prior to h

Eddie Hopson, Jr., is a longtime employee of DaimlerChrysler Corporation who has applied unsuccessfully for several open positions within the company, many of which would have been promotions. Believing that he was unable to obtain these jobs because of his race, Hopson filed suit against his employer alleging disparate treatment under Title VII and Michigan law. After limited discovery, DaimlerCh

Susan Thorn, a Twin Cities bus driver and member of the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) and its Local 1005 (collectively, "the Unions"), brought this suit against her employer and the Unions asserting claims for sexual harassment and reprisal discrimination in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2(c), -3(a), and the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA), Minn. Stat. § 363.03, subds. 1 & 7. T

Dustrol is a paving maintenance company located in Lincoln, Nebraska. Mohr worked for Dustrol as a flagger on the seasonal heating crew in 1997 and 1998. The duties of a flagger involve controlling traffic in road construction zones by setting up and taking down traffic signs, signaling cars to stop or slow, and driving a lead vehicle through the work area. Although Mohr was occasionally repro

Francisco Vasquez, a deputy probation officer at a Los Angeles County youth detention center, brought this action against the County, alleging that the County violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by discriminating against him on the basis of his national origin, subjecting him to a hostile work environment, and retaliating against him for filing discrimina-tion charges. * * * Francisco

1 We granted this interlocutory appeal to decide whether the trial court correctly ruled that an at will employee who claims to have been discriminated against by her employer and who is unable to seek relief under the Utah Anti-Discrimination Act can pursue a civil action for wrongful termination in contravention of an alleged public policy against sex discrimination.

BACKGROUND

2 Pl

1 Jeremy Flanders was severely injured after he was brutally attacked by other inmates at the "Tent City" Maricopa County Jail facility. Flanders brought an action in superior court against defendants, the Sheriff and his wife, the Sheriff's Office ("MCSO"), and Maricopa County. Flanders alleged that defendants' gross negligence and civil rights violations rendered them responsible for his i

Kathleen Roche appeals the district court's1 grant of summary judgment on her disability discrimination and rehabilitation claims against her employer, Saint Lukes Shawnee Mission Health Systems (Saint Lukes) based on the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794, the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA), Mo. Rev. Stat. § 287.780, the Family Medical Leave Act, 29 U.S.C. § 2601, and Missouri's worker's c

This is a suit that is going no-where; but the district court, by granting a motion to dis-miss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), buried it prematurely because a few faint signs of life remained. A frequent filer (see Bontkowski v. United States, 28 F.3d 36 (7th Cir. 1994); Bontkowski v. First National Bank of Cicero, 998 F.2d 459 (7th Cir. 1993); Bontkowski v. Jenkins, 661 F. Supp. 576 (N.D.