Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
National Litigation Hotline
Community College Shielded from Same-Sex Harassment Charges
The Eleventh Circuit has held that the doctrine of qualified immunity served to bar a sexual harassment lawsuit brought by four security guards at Jefferson State Community College in Birmingham, AL. Snider v. Jefferson State Cmty. Coll., 2003 WL 22119938 (Sep. 15).
Four security guards at an Alabama community college, Thomas Snider, John Ponder, Tommy Diltz, and Benny Gilcrest, were allegedly subjected to unwanted sexual harassment by the college's head of security, William Shelnutt, from 1983 through July 1998. Specifically, the four employees alleged that, over a period of approximately 15 months, Shelnutt inappropriately and constantly touched them and made sexually suggestive comments and gestures. Ultimately, the four guards sued the school, the school's President, the school's Dean of Business Operations, and Shelnutt in federal district court, charging that the defendants other than Shelnutt had violated their constitutional rights to equal protection by failing to stop Shelnutt's conduct despite their knowledge of it and their duty to prevent such conduct from occurring. The defendants moved to dismiss the plaintiffs' complaint, arguing that each of the defendants was protected from suit under the doctrine of qualified immunity because whether the alleged harassment violated the Equal Protection Clause was unknown when the alleged harassment occurred. The four plaintiffs appealed.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?