Recently in Employment Law Category

In an ERISA action based on the discontinuation of plaintiff's long-term disability (LTD) benefits, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed in part where defendant-insurer could not be held liable for statutory penalties because 29 U.S.C. section 1132(c) only provided a cause of action against plan administrators.  However, the order is reversed in part where defendant's failure to comply with its duty under section 1133(2) to provide plaintiff with "a reasonable opportunity for a full and fair review" of defendant's decision to discontinue plaintiff's LTD benefits excused plaintiff's failure to exhaust before bringing suit under section 1132(a).

Read Brown v. J.B. Hunt Transp. Servs., Inc., No. 08-3803

Appellate Information

Argued October 8, 2009

Decided November 17, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Riley

In a case involving whether, after NFL quarterback Michael Vick was convicted of dog fighting charges, his team was entitled to recover certain bonus money he earned, rulings against the NFL are affirmed where: 1) the district court properly rejected the NFL's argument that Vick's roster bonuses were signing bonus allocations subject to the years-performed test; and 2) it did not err in determining that the bonuses were earned when Vick met the roster provisions in his contract, and were thus not subject to forfeiture pursuant to the terms of a settlement in an antitrust class action and the CBA.  Moreover, the denial of the NFL's motion to recuse the district judge and terminate the consent decree is affirmed where 1) there was no indication that the NFL was restrained by any fear of antitrust liability; 2) the parties' agreement to the district court's involvement mitigated concerns about unsettling the power structure under the labor laws; and 3) the district judge's comments to the press did not create an appearance of partiality.

Read White v. Nat'l Football League, No. 08-2001

Appellate Information

Submitted: March 12, 2009

Filed: November 10, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Wollman

In an ERISA action seeking additional retirement benefits under defendant's retirement plan, an award of damages against defendant on the ground that plaintiffs' accrued benefits were decreased by the conversion of the plan into a cash balance system is reversed where neither ERISA nor the terms of the plan precluded defendant from calculating the opening cash balances using the plan's discount rate. Adverse rulings against plaintiffs regarding the determination of the date of the plan conversion and on their ERISA age discrimination claim are affirmed on cross appeal.

Read Sunder v. U.S. Bancorp Pension Plan, No. 07-3485

Appellate Information

Submitted: April 13, 2009

Filed: November 9, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Hansen

In an age discrimination action based on an alleged wrongful termination, summary judgment for defendant is reversed where there was evidence that people who participated in the decision to terminate plaintiff evinced a preference for the employment of younger workers over persons in the class protected by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.

Read Baker v. Silver Oak Senior Living Mgmt. Co., No. 08-1036

Appellate Information

Submitted: October 15, 2008

Filed: September 14, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Colloton

In an action for breach of a collective bargaining agreement between the NFL and the NFL players' union based on drug testing issues, the district court's order concluding that the Minnesota statutory claims alleged by football players against the NFL were not preempted by section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act is affirmed, where: 1) the district court had no need to consult the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) in order to resolve the players' Minnesota Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace Act (DATWA) claim; 2) the NFL's defenses to liability under the Minnesota Consumable Products Act (CPA) were not relevant to the Section 301 analysis; and 3) the NFL did not demonstrate that, by agreeing to be bound by the CBA, the players waived their rights under the CPA.

Read Williams v. Nat'l. Football League, No. 09-2247

Appellate Information

Submitted: August 18, 2009

Filed: September 11, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Shepherd

In an action seeking to confirm a portion of an arbitrator's back pay award allegedly imposed against a union, summary judgment for plaintiff is reversed where, in labeling the union "responsible for the back pay from January 21, 2005 through and including September 9, 2005," the arbitrator did not intend to award back pay against the union for that period.

Read Turner v. United Steelworkers of Am., No. 08-3116

Appellate Information

Submitted: April 14, 2009

Filed: September 11, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Loken

In plaintiff's employment discrimination lawsuit under Title VII, summary judgment for the Missouri Department of Corrections is affirmed where: 1) the district court correctly granted summary judgment on a hostile work environment claim as the offensive conduct did not constitute actionable harassment under Title VII; and 2) district court correctly granted the summary judgment on the retaliation claim as plaintiff failed to prove that a reasonable person would perceive as retaliatory the actions she found offensive, and actions by her co-workers are not sufficient to support a conclusion that they were materially adverse retaliatory actions.      

Read Sutherland v. Missouri Dep't of Corr., No. 08-3000

Appellate Information

Submitted: March 10, 2009

Filed: September 8, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Benton, Circuit Judge

In former college president's action against the college's Board of Trustees alleging violation of his state and federal statutory and constitutional rights, denial of defendant's motion for qualified immunity is affirmed where plaintiff's employment was terminated in an open session of the Board for alleged misconduct including dishonesty - an accepted stigmatizing charge - and thus, plaintiff sufficiently demonstrated a violation of his clearly established due process right to a post-termination name-clearing hearing. 

Read Rush v. Perryman, No. 08-3148

Appellate Information

Submitted: March 12, 2009

Filed: September 3, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Smith, Circuit Judge

In an employment discrimination action against a school district alleging that the district breached its employment contract with the plaintiff and that it unlawfully used race in its hiring practices, summary judgment for district is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) evidence that an employer followed an affirmative action plan in taking a challenged adverse employment action may constitute direct evidence of unlawful discrimination; 2) plaintiff presented sufficient direct evidence of unlawful race discrimination by showing that there are genuine issues of material fact regarding the district's affirmative action policies and its actions; 3) summary judgment on another failure to promote claim was proper as she failed to exhaust her administrative remedies; and 4) plaintiff's state law claims are reinstated for reconsideration.   

Read Humphries v. Pulaski County Special Sch. Dist., No. 08-2485

Appellate Information

Submitted: April 16, 2009

Filed: September 3, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Gruender, Circuit Judge

District court's judgment affirming the denial of claimant's application for disability insurance benefits is reversed and remanded where an ALJ's conclusion that claimant could have performed her past relevant work was not supported by substantial evidence as claimant's treating physician's opinion that claimant could not perform light work was improperly discredited. 

Read Tilley v. Astrue, No. 08-3537

Appellate Information

Submitted: April 15, 2009

Filed: September 1, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Wollman, Circuit Judge