After a four-day trial, the district court instructed the jury that it could find in favor of the plaintiff only if he proved that discrimination was the “sole reason” for the challenged employment decision. So instructed, the jury found against Ponce
Ponce Amiucs Brief_AARP MWELA NELA_Final_12-28-11.pdf
Dear NELA Members: The Civil Jury Project at the New York University School of Law currently is studying the causes and consequences of the pronounced decline in civil jury trials in both state and federal courts
The Employee Rights Advocacy Institute For Law & Policy Toolkit Paper: Preserving The Right To A Jury Trial By Preventing Adverse Credibility Inferences At Summary Judgment examines three pernicious ways in which courts make determinations about the credibility of witnesses at summary judgment (a task more appropriately left to the jury): discrediting the testimony of the plaintiff’s witnesses as “self-serving,” accepting unchallenged the defendant’s “honest belief” that they did not discriminate, and deferring to a defendant’s “business judgment.”
The Employee Rights Advocacy Institute For Law & Policy Toolkit Paper: Securing The Right To A Jury Trial: Attacking "Stray Remarks" At Summary Judgment examines the history and development of the "stray remarks" doctrine, discusses the treatment it has received from the courts and commentators, and offers practical tips from experienced practitioners on how to overcome the doctrine when it arises
Nassar suffered discrimination and harassment at the hands of his supervisor, resulting in his constructive discharge, and was retaliated against when he complained of the illegal treatment directed toward him. A jury returned a verdict in favor of Dr. Nassar, including on the retaliation claim for which the judge had given the jury a motivating factor charge as urged by the defendant. During the remedy phase, the district court instructed the jury on UTSW’s same decision affirmative defense, which the jury rejected in ruling for Dr
This case asks the court to affirm a jury’s verdict that FTS’s company-wide policy requiring its cable technicians to work overtime hours without compensation violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
NELA Amicus Brief_FINAL_7.02.15.pdf
After a sixteen-day jury trial and a three-day bench trial, the district court entered judgment in favor of plaintiffs
The challenge for employee advocates is to get judges and juries to understand the deleterious effect of stereotypes and other forms of hidden bias on decision-making
Horton Case Protecting Workers' Access To Justice Limiting The Reach Of Wal-Mart : The Institute's FLSA Collective Action Database Join The Institute In New York For Trial By Jury Or Trial By Motion?
This case involves the appeal of a district court’s grant of summary judgment to the Hearst Corporation by concluding that no reasonable jury could find that the unpaid intern plaintiffs are employees doing work meriting payment of minimum wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), as interpreted by an earlier Second Circuit case, Glatt v
Wang v. Hearst Corp_Amicus Final_011317.pdf
The article explores whether comparator evidence is required to make a prima facie case for discrimination; whether plaintiffs should ever be required to present “identical” or “nearly identical” comparators; and whether the probative value of comparator evidence is best determined by a jury. This most recent installment in the Summary Judgment Toolkit was written by Matthew C
Each of our seasoned advocates will present on a different underlying subject matter, and will share their tips and tactics for engaging your next jury effectively
Escriba is appealing from a jury verdict in favor of the employer. The ruling below upholding the jury verdict was premised on a flawed interpretation of the law that Ms
1 Comment - no search term matches found in comments.
The Employee Rights Advocacy Institute For Law & Policy (The Institute), NELA's public interest organization, has had overwhelming interest in its upcoming symposium, entitled " Trial By Jury Or Trial By Motion?
This post wraps up our coverage of The Institute's Symposium (" Trial By Jury Or Trial By Motion?
The Amicus Program website should be of particular interest to NELA members because it now makes available the criteria EEOC uses to evaluate whether to participate in a case, provides instructions on submitting an amicus request to the Commission, and announces a new email address - amicus@eeoc.gov - where counsel can submit such requests
City of Akron , in which Akron firefighters alleged race and age discrimination claims involving promotions. In 2008, a jury found for the firefighters and awarded them $1,891,000 in damages
” Amici urged the Second Circuit to reverse the district court’s decision and remand to allow a jury to decide the question of the drivers’ employment status under the FLSA
FINAL Filed Amicus Brief Saleem v. CTG.pdf
Amici urged the Second Circuit to reverse the district court’s decision and remand to allow a jury to decide the question of the drivers’ employment status under the FLSA
Based on trial testimony from many of these technicians, and other employees, a jury found that “FTS was liable under the FLSA for its company-wide practice of under-paying its technicians for overtime.”
Please note that credit (if available) is only provided to registered attendees participating at their own computer and phone. Simple instructions with a link to the program will be sent when you register
One was warranted here because this issue falls squarely within NELA’s current amicus priorities of combatting summary judgment abuse and challenging judicially created doctrines that erect barriers to jury trial access to plaintiffs alleging employment discrimination
NELA Amicus Brief_Graves v. DBSI_Final.pdf
Nearly 200 employee advocates, judges and academics joined NELA's charitable organization, The Employee Rights Advocacy Institute For Law & Policy, on Monday, April 23 at New York Law School for a symposium called, " Trial By Jury Or Trial By Motion?
Having different standards for proving intentional discrimination under the same statute would only create confusion for the parties, the trial courts, and the jury. Author: Professor Michael L
12-484 bsac National Employment Lawyers Association et al.pdf
The Oakland Raiderettes are among the millions of workers across America who are compelled by their employers to give up their rights to go to court and a trial by jury because of forced arbitration clauses