News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Employment Discrimination › Muldrow v City of St Louis

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 -
McAfee & Taft

After Muldrow, courts find standard of ‘some harm’ challenging to apply to workplace clashes

McAfee & Taft on

In April of this year, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision with the potential to significantly alter the scope of employment discrimination claims. The case, Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, addressed what employer actions...more

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

SCOTUS Takes Up Another Case With DEI Implications

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP on

Last week, the Supreme Court accepted review of Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services. The court will address a circuit split regarding the standard courts apply in discrimination claims brought by majority group...more

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

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP on

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

McAfee & Taft

Is being criticized by your supervisor ‘some harm’ and, therefore, discriminatory?

McAfee & Taft on

The recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis appears to have expanded the universe of “adverse employment actions” that could support an employee’s discrimination claim. The Supreme Court stated in...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

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP on

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

Proskauer - California Employment Law

May 2024 California Employment Law Notes

Proskauer - California Employment Law on

We invite you to review our newly-posted May 2024 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law....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

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP

Supreme Court Returns Title VII to Its Roots and Lowers the Standard to Prove Discrimination

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP on

Title VII makes it unlawful to discriminate against employees on the basis of their gender, race, national origin, color or religion. Nowhere does it provide an express definition of discrimination or establish a standard a...more

Payne & Fears

April 2024 Case Summaries

Payne & Fears on

Mattioda v. Nelson, 98 F.4th 1164 (9th Cir. 2024) - Summary: Disability-based harassment claims are available under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act....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

Foley & Lardner LLP

Update: Supreme Court Revises Title VII’s Decades-Old “Adverse Employment Action” Standard for Discriminatory Transfers

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In January 2024, we reported on a significant case, Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, No. 22-193, which was then pending before the United States Supreme Court. On April 17, 2024, the Court issued its decision in this...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

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

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

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

Bressler, Amery & Ross, P.C. on

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

Quarles & Brady LLP

Supreme Court Identifies Employee-Favorable Standard for Workplace Discrimination Claims

Quarles & Brady LLP on

On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court held in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis that an employee alleging a discriminatory job transfer need only show “some injury” respecting their employment terms or conditions, rather than a...more

Holland & Hart - Employers' Lawyers

Supreme Court Lowers Bar for Adverse Actions

Holland & Hart - Employers' Lawyers on

Can an employee sue under Title VII to challenge a lateral transfer, even if the transfer does not result in a loss of pay? According to a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision, the answer is: Yes....more

54 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3
Next »

"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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide