News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States Employer Liability Issues Lateral Transfers

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Lathrop GPM

Title VII & Lateral Transfers - Treacherous Territory after United States Supreme Court Ruling

Lathrop GPM on

The United States Supreme Court recently settled a circuit split concerning when an involuntary lateral transfer may violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Court’s opinion in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis...more

PilieroMazza PLLC

Supreme Court Opens Door to Broader Spectrum of Employment Discrimination Cases

PilieroMazza PLLC on

In April 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court held that transferring an employee to a new position with the same rank and pay may constitute an adverse action under Title VII. The recent decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis,...more

Fisher Phillips

SCOTUS 2023/24 Lookback and Preview: 8 Key Rulings that Impact the Workplace and 4 New Cases for Employers to Track Next Term

Fisher Phillips on

The Supreme Court issued several momentous decisions last term that will have a lasting impact on employer practices. The Justices continued to shape the workplace law landscape by ruling on an array of issues involving...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Supreme Court Lowers the Bar for Title VII Employment Claims

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act requires employees alleging employment discrimination to show they suffered an adverse employment action as a result of their membership in a protected class....more

Polsinelli

No Harm, No Foul: The Supreme Court Reduces “Harm” Standard for Discriminatory Job Transfer Claims under Title VII

Polsinelli on

In April, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, that to sustain a prima facie case of employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), plaintiffs do...more

Franczek P.C.

Recent Supreme Court Decision Clarifies Lower Standard of Harm for Job Transfers under Title VII

Franczek P.C. on

In a recent decision, Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified the standard for determining whether an adverse employment action is a sufficient basis for a discrimination claim under Title VII of the...more

Saul Ewing LLP

Employees No Longer Required to Prove Significant Harm for Title VII Claims

Saul Ewing LLP on

Under the recent Supreme Court Ruling of Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, employees no longer need to suffer “significant” harm to state a claim of discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”)....more

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP

Sixth Circuit Rules That Accommodation Requests Under the ADA Can Be Inferred Without Explicit Employee Request

Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, which lowered the threshold for employees to demonstrate discrimination under Title VII, the Sixth Circuit has expanded the scope of what employers...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Title VII Doesn’t Require ‘Significance Test,’ Supreme Court Rules

A Title VII plaintiff does not need to demonstrate that the injury alleged satisfies a significance test, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled. ...more

Akerman LLP

How Much Worse Off Must an Employee Be Post-Job Transfer to State a Title VII Claim?

Akerman LLP on

In what may be considered a “win” for employees, the United States Supreme Court recently clarified that an employee challenging a job transfer as “discriminatory” need only prove that they sustained “some” harm due to the...more

Conn Maciel Carey LLP

Employers Beware: Title VII Now Allows Employees to More Easily Challenge Your Decision to Transfer or Reassign Them

Conn Maciel Carey LLP on

On April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, a case involving a St. Louis Police Department officer’s claim that she was subject to a discriminatory job...more

Venable LLP

Labor Pains: You Moved My Parking Spot! I'm Suing

Venable LLP on

Picture this: You're just about set to open a new workplace in Smallsville. The only hurdle remaining is finding the right person to manage the new location. After giving this problem considerable thought, you think you've...more

Lerch, Early & Brewer

What Employers Need to Know About the Recent Supreme Court Decision in Muldrow

Lerch, Early & Brewer on

On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court issued a decision in Muldrow vs. City of St. Louis, which held that Title VII – which bars employers from discriminating in decisions involving among other things, lateral transfers – does...more

Bricker Graydon LLP

Supreme Court Expands Workers’ Ability to Sue Based on Job Transfer

Bricker Graydon LLP on

In a recently decided case, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a job transfer may demonstrate adverse action even when the transfer does not result in a loss of pay or other benefit. A unanimous Court held in Muldrow v. City of...more

Cranfill Sumner LLP

Supreme Court Lowers the Bar for Employment Discrimination Claims: Only “Some Injury” Required

Cranfill Sumner LLP on

On April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis (No. 22-193) and held that “some injury” is sufficient to establish a federal discrimination or...more

Miles & Stockbridge P.C.

Supreme Court Eases Standard for Employees to Demonstrate Title VII Discrimination

The Supreme Court last month made it easier for employees who are involuntarily transferred from one position to another to pursue employment discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964....more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

No More Adjectives… Just Some Harm: Supreme Rules on Title VII Job Transfer Threshold

If you transfer an employee to a job with no loss in pay or title but the employee thinks it is less desirable, can that employee sue you for discrimination under Title VII? While it depends on the facts, in Muldrow v. St....more

Gould + Ratner LLP

Supreme Court Ruling Will Affect Employer Decisions Regarding Mandatory Transfers

Gould + Ratner LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that a mandatory job transfer might be considered an “adverse employment action” under federal anti-discrimination law. Following this decision, which creates a lesser standard for...more

Bressler, Amery & Ross, P.C.

Supreme Court Clarifies Low Threshold of Harm that Must Be Shown in Title VII Employment Discrimination Claims

Introduction - The nation’s highest court has lowered the bar for involuntarily transferred employees to make the necessary showing of harm to make out a case of Title VII employment discrimination....more

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

Supreme Court Holds That Employees Need Not Show “Significant” Harm to Support a Title VII Discrimination Claim Based on a Job...

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

In a recent decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled that a lateral job transfer can – in certain circumstances – be an illegal adverse action and support a claim for a lawsuit for unlawful discrimination. This...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

SCOTUS Lowered the Threshold of Harm Required for Title VII Discrimination Claims

Ballard Spahr LLP on

Last week, on April 17, 2024, the US Supreme Court unanimously held in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, et al., that an employee challenging a job transfer under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII)...more

Benesch

Supreme Court Lowers Plaintiffs’ Burden for Title VII Discriminatory Transfer Claims

Benesch on

On April 17, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously lowered the burden applicable to discriminatory transfer claims brought under Title VII. According to the Court, a showing of some harm—rather than significant or some...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

The U.S. Supreme Court Lowers the Standard for an Employee to Prove Workplace Discrimination from an Involuntary Job Transfer

On April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued its unanimous decision in Muldrow v. St. Louis, 601 U.S. _____ (2024), which addressed the appropriate standard for evaluating whether a job transfer – even where the...more

BakerHostetler

SCOTUS Holds that Job Transferees Need Only Show ‘Some Harm’ Under Title VII

BakerHostetler on

SCOTUS announces ‘some harm’ standard for Title VII claims based on a mandatory job transfer. The Supreme Court in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, et al., 601 U.S. ____ (April 17, 2024), held that where an...more

Roetzel & Andress

United States Supreme Court Holds That Involuntary Job Transfers Can Violate Title VII

Roetzel & Andress on

On April 16, 2024, in the case of Muldrow v. St. Louis, the United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discriminatory job transfers, even if the transfer does not...more

53 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide