Tonya Walker ("Walker") sued her employer United Parcel Service, Inc. ("UPS"), advancing federally-based claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended ("Title VII," 42 U.S.C. §2000e to 2000e-17) and the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 ("FMLA," 29 U.S.C. §2601-2654) and various tort claims under Oklahoma common law.(1) Walker's Title VII claims were based on alleged sexual

Civil Rights - District court did not err in admitting evidence of harassment and discrimination directed at other employees, as the evidence was relevant and properly limited by appropriate jury instructions; evidence was sufficient to support submission of punitive damage claim, but the instruction given to the jury was erroneous in that it did not correctly instruct the jury on the period of ti

Plaintiff-appellant Ortiz brought this employment discrimination action against his former employer, the Secretary of the Interior. Plaintiff alleged discrimination based on his Hispanic national origin and retaliation for a previous, successful discrimination complaint. The district court's jurisdiction was based on 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16(c) and 28 U.S.C. § 1331. The district court granted summary

Cynthia M. Bausman began her employment with Defendant-Appellee Interstate Brands Corporation ("IBC") on June 28, 1986. She worked at IBC until her discharge from employment on July 5, 1994. Ms. Bausman brought an action for wrongful discharge against IBC, alleging that IBC terminated her employment in retaliation for her filing of a workers' compensation claim, and that IBC did so in violation of

Plaintiff seeks review of the district court's dismissal of his action against Sprint, which alleges violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634(b). The court granted defendants' motion to dismiss, holding that plaintiff failed to show excusable neglect for not responding to the motion

Plaintiff-appellant Kathleen M. Cifra appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York, Neal P. McCurn, Judge, dismissing her complaint alleging that defendants General Electric Company and Lockheed Martin Corporation as its successor (collectively "GE" or the "Company") violated her rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.

The underlying facts of this case are largely uncontroverted. Plaintiff is an African-American who worked for the City of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma for approximately 17 years before she was selected for a reduction in force ("RIF"). When she was terminated from the City's personnel department effective July 1, 1995, she brought suit, alleging six causes of action: employment discrimination based upo

Michael W. Bass appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment to the Board of County Commissioners of Orange County in his lawsuit claiming race discrimination in violation of Title VII and the Equal Protection Clause, as well as retaliation in violation of Title VII.

* * *

In August 1995, the Orange County Fire and Rescue Division (the "Division" or "Fire and Rescue Division

Wrongful discharge - Retaliation by former MBTA employee Robert Edwards who claimed that she was discharged for telling MBTA employees who felt that they had been discriminated against to sue the T. In 1997, Edwards was the highest-ranking woman and the second highest-ranking African-American at the MBTA, which had an acknowledged history of discrimination against minorities and women. When she t

Baker Petrolite Corporation ("Baker") appeals a judgment entered against it following a jury verdict in favor of Appellee, Lewis Turck, in his lawsuit for alleged wrongful retaliatory discharge under Oklahoma law. The jury found that Turck's termination was significantly motivated by and in retaliation for his attempt to consult his workers' compensation attorney during his pending workers' compen

Fathy M. A. Saleh (Saleh) and Godwin O. Mbagwu (Mbagwu) (together "Appellees"), tenured professors at Virginia State University (VSU), brought employment discrimination actions against several VSU administrators, including the University Presi- dent and Provost, in their individual capacities. Both Saleh and Mbagwu alleged race and national origin discrimination under 42 U.S.C. SS 1981 and 1

Terri Cleary appeals from the district court's order granting sum- mary judgment in favor of her former employer, Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, on her claim of retaliation under section 704 of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. S 2000e-3(a). Cleary asserts that Nationwide retaliated against her for making a sexual harassment charge to the company against her supervisor.

Michael Weston filed a sexual harassment civil action against his employer, the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections ("PDOC"), and Dolor es Merithew, a co- worker. Weston alleged violations of Title VII, the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act ("PHRA"), and Pennsylvania common law. Weston's Title VII claim was premised on a hostile work environment theory. Specifically, Weston asserted that

Lina Zhuang, an Asian female, worked for ten months in 1995 and 1996 as a Chinese translator for J.D. Edwards & Company. She was hired at will to work on emporary translation projects, and was recommended for the next available full-time position. When she did not get a full-time position, she did not return to work. Her suit alleged unlawful discrimination and retaliation under Title VII of the C

Job Discrimination - 42 U.S.C. 2000e - age discrimination and retaliation claims - Specific claims made and defenses asserted at not available at this time.

Alleged acts of retaliation were not shown to be causally related to plaintiff's reports of sexual harassment and were not sufficiently adverse within the meaning of Title VII to establish a prima facie case of retaliation; alleged acts were not sufficient to establish a prima facie case of discrimination; plaintiff also failed to establish she was treated differently than similarly-situated males

. Faye Oest worked as a correctional officer for the Illinois Department of Corrections ("Department") until she was discharged under the Department's progressive discipline system. In this action, she alleges that the Department violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. sec. 2000e et seq., when it (1) discriminated against her on the basis of sex and (2) discharged he

Plaintiff-Appellant James McCurdy brought this § 1983 suit against Defendants-Appellees Officer David Cole and Montgomery County, claiming that they violated his right to be free from unreasonable seizures under the Fourth Amendment and retaliated against him for the assertion of his First Amendment rights. The district court dismissed McCurdy's First Amendment retaliation claim after granting Off

After 27 years as an employee of New York Life Insurance Company ("New York Life"), Phyllis Meloff lost her job for billing seven months of personal commuting expenses to the company's American Express card and failing to reimburse the company. Her supervisor sent an electronic message ("e-mail"), eventually forwarded to 16 employees, stating Meloff was fired for defrauding the company. She sued,

Plaintiff, an agent with the United States Customs Service, brought this suite against the United States alleging that the Defendant had violated federal law by failing to promote him to the position of Senior Special Agent. Plaintiff asserted three separate violations in his cause of action: Title VII race discrimination, Title VII retaliation, and age discrimination under the Age Discrimination

Parties stipulated to facts necessary to establish diversity jurisdiction and claims court did not have subject matter jurisdiction rejected; court did not err in finding Minnesota Human Rights Act claim was time barred; continuing violation argument rejected as plaintiff failed to identify any act of discrimination which occurred during the limitations period that indicated a widespread system of

Wrongful Termination - Retaliation for filing workers' compensation claim.

Civil rights. Plaintiff failed to provide evidence that the City retaliated against him for speaking out on Fire Department issues, and City was entitled to summary judgment.

The District Court 2 granted defendant's motion for summary judgment on Randal L. Bechtel's ("Bechtel") First Amendment freedom of speech claim for retaliation filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and on his state action

Plaintiff, a psychological technician at Defendant Muskogee Regional Medical Center (an entity of the city of Muskogee), brought an action against Defendant under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for First Amendment retaliation. Plaintiff claimed that she was terminated because she notified the County Health Department regarding the poor condition of a patient that Defendant had received from a referring facility

Civil case - civil rights. In retaliation case, evidence that supervisor who terminated plaintiff had specific knowledge of the protected activity is not an element of a prima facie case; circumstantial evidence may be used to establish the causal connection between the activity and the adverse action; jury verdict did not include front pay, and the court did not err in making a separate award of