Court OKs suits on retaliation in race cases
Court Alerts
The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that workers who face retaliation after complaining about race discrimination may sue their employers under a Civil War-era law.
The court said in a 7-2 ruling that retaliation is another form of intentional, unlawful discrimination that is barred by the Civil Rights Act of 1866. It was enacted to benefit newly freed blacks.
Business groups objected that the law does not expressly prohibit retaliation and said employees should have to file suit under another law, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That law has a shorter deadline for filing suit and caps the amount of money that a successful plaintiff may recover.
The Bush administration was on the side of the workers.
The provision of the 1866 law, known as section 1981, does not explicitly mention retaliation.
But Justice Stephen Breyer, in his majority opinion, said that previous Supreme Court decisions and congressional action make clear that retaliation is covered.
Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented.
The case grew out of the firing of a black associate manager at a Cracker Barrel restaurant in Bradley, Ill. Hedrick Humphries claimed he was fired after he complained about race discrimination by other Cracker Barrel supervisors.
Related listings
-
Companies' `sexy' hair fight spills into NY court
Court Alerts 05/26/2008Victoria's Secret finds itself in one "sexy" legal fight after a trademark board ruled that its "So Sexy" hair products create confusion with a rival company's family of trademarks.The latest tussle over who has legitimate claim to what's "sexy" in t...
-
Top court overturns dead fly-in-water damage claim
Court Alerts 05/23/2008A man who claimed that he became depressed, anxious and phobic after finding a a dead fly in a bottle of water will no longer get the judgment he won against a bottling company, Canada's top court ruled Thursday.Martin Mustapha will have to shell out...
-
Court strikes down Va. late-term abortion ban
Court Alerts 05/22/2008A Virginia law banning a type of late-term abortion is still unconstitutional, even though a similar federal ban was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.The 2-1 decision by a panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of ...
Is Now the Time to Really Call a Special Education Lawyer?
IDEA, FAPE, CHILD FIND and IEPs: The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) guarantees all children with disabilities to a free appropriate public education (FAPE). FAPE starts with a school’s responsibility to identify that a child has a disability (Child Find) and create an Individualized Education Program (IEP) to suit the needs of the child.
Forte Law Group is one of only a very few law firms within the state of Connecticut that is dedicated to exclusively representing families and children with special needs.
Parents need to be persistent, dedicated and above all else aware of the many services and accommodations that their child is entitled to under the law. As early as this point within your child’s special education, many parents will often find themselves in the situation asking, “is now the time to really call a special education lawyer?” Here are a few things to consider when asking yourself that question.