Search :
     
 
     

 
If Defendant Voluntarily Grants Relief Rendering Case Moot, Plaintiff is not a “Prevailing Party” and not Entitled to Attorneys Fees
Jun 25,2009
COMMENTS( 0 )
Filed under: Employment Law, ADA  
By Wong Fleming, PC  
 
Mental Illness Can Toll Requirement that Employment Discrimination Plaintiffs Exhaust Administrative Remedies Before Filing Suit
Mar 09,2009
COMMENTS( 0 )
Filed under: Employment Law, ADA; Employment Law, Title VII  
By Wong Walker Bowman Fleming, P.C.  
 
In Determining Eligibility for Religious Exemption from ADA, Discovery is Critical
Mar 29,2007
COMMENTS( 0 )
Filed under: Employment Law, ADA; Employment Law, Discrimination, Disability  
By Wong Fleming  
Doe v. Abington Friends School, 480 F.3d 252 (3d Cir. March 15, 2007).

ADA plaintiffs must be allowed to conduct discovery on a defendant’s eligibility for the religious exemption before their claims may be dismissed on those grounds. The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that the plaintiffs of Doe v. Abington Friends School should have been permitted to develop the record to elucidate the extent to which the defendant is, or is controlled by, a religious organization before the lower court ruled on the defendant’s motion to dispose of their claims. Therefore, the Third Circuit reversed the summary judgment granted by the district court and remanded the case for additional discovery to determine whether Abington Friends School (“Abington”) is exempt from the strictures of the ADA.
Read More
 
Existence of Hostile Work Environment Alone Does Not Entitle Plaintiff to Award of Back Pay
Dec 13,2006
COMMENTS( 0 )
Filed under: Employment Law, ADA; Employment Law, Discrimination, Disability  
By Wong Fleming  
Spencer v. Wal-Mart Stores, 469 F.3d 311 (3d Cir. November 22, 2006)

Simply proving the existence of a hostile work environment does not entitle a plaintiff to an award of back pay; an actual or constructive discharge must still be established. In Spencer, a jury verdict, not a judge, initially granted the plaintiff $15,000 in back pay, despite the fact that she had not left her job and had not lost wages. The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld a lower court’s ruling that vacated that jury verdict. The Court reasoned that because the plaintiff did not request back pay from the lower court, she was not entitled to such an award.  Moreover, the Court held that, even if the plaintiff had requested back pay, the award would not have been granted because the plaintiff did not prove that she had been constructively discharged.
Read More
 
Existence of Hostile Work Environment Alone Does Not Entitle Plaintiff to Award of Back Pay
Dec 13,2006
COMMENTS( 0 )
Filed under: Employment Law, ADA; Employment Law, Discrimination, Disability  
By Wong Fleming  
Spencer v. Wal-Mart Stores, 469 F.3d 311 (3d Cir. November 22, 2006)

Simply proving the existence of a hostile work environment does not entitle a plaintiff to an award of back pay; an actual or constructive discharge must still be established. In Spencer, a jury verdict, not a judge, initially granted the plaintiff $15,000 in back pay, despite the fact that she had not left her job and had not lost wages. The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld a lower court’s ruling that vacated that jury verdict. The Court reasoned that because the plaintiff did not request back pay from the lower court, she was not entitled to such an award.  Moreover, the Court held that, even if the plaintiff had requested back pay, the award would not have been granted because the plaintiff did not prove that she had been constructively discharged.
Read More
 
 
 
 
 
DISCLAIMER AND TERMS OF USE
Please read the disclaimer, and understand that you are accepting its terms, before reading any posts on this blog.
Editor: Wendy Lucas
About the Editor
Username:
 
Password:
 
If you have forgotten your username
or password,
click here.
RSS 
Arbitration
    Arbitration Agreements
Civil Rights
    Fee-Shifting
  Freedom of Speech
  Public Accommodations
  Search & Seizure
  Section 1981
  Section 1983
  Section 1985
  Title IX
Class Actions
    Fee-Shifting
Consumer Protection
    Consumer Fraud
Corporate Law
    Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX)
Employment Law
    ADA
  ADEA
  Choice of Law
  Civil Service
  Confidentiality Agreements
  Disability Benefits
  Discrimination
    Age
    Disability
    Political Affiliation
    Pregnancy
    Race
    Religious
    Retaliation
    Sex
    Sexual Orientation
  ERISA
  Family and Medical Leave Act
  Fee-Shifting
  Hostile Work Environment
  Restrictive Covenants
  Title VII
  Trade Secrets
  Unemployment Benefits
  Whistleblowers' Rights
  Workers' Compensation
Evidence
    Collateral Estoppel
  Confidentiality & Privilege
  Damages
  Expert Witnesses
  Fee-Shifting
  Taxation
False Claims Act
    Fee-Shifting
Jurisdiction
    Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Public Entities
    Absolute Immunity
  Qualified Immunity
  Tort Claims Act
 
September 2010
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30
 
E-mail Address:
 
 
 
Home : Terms of Use : Privacy Policy : wongfleming.com