Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
In plaintiff's employment discrimination action against Craftmatic under Title VII, section 1981 and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (PHRA), the district court's judgment is affirmed as to all of plaintiff's claims under Title VII and the PHRA as well as her section 1981 claims for a hostile work environment and retaliation as she was not an employee of Craftmatic, but rather an independent contractor. District court's grant of Craftmatic's motion for summary judgment as to plaintiff's section 1981 claim that her termination was motivated by racial animus is reversed because there remain questions for a jury regarding whether Craftmatic would have terminated plaintiff's contract absent consideration of her race.
On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania(D.C. Civil Action No. 2-07-cv-00859)
District Judge: Honorable Gary L. Lancaster
Opinion Filed September 11, 2009
Opinion by: Sloviter, Circuit Judge
Counsel for Appellee: William G. Merchant, Hilary W. Taylor, Papernick & Gefsky