Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
If you have practiced employment law for more than a decade, you probably assume that Title VII does not cover transsexuals, transvestites or other transgendered individuals. It's simple: A lot of cases have held that “sex” discrimination does not extend beyond traditional notions of “male” and “female.” Besides, an individual's sexual orientation is not protected under Title VII, so why should the transgendered be protected?
Such an assumption is no longer necessarily valid. There appears to be a growing trend toward recognizing a cause of action for sex discrimination under Title VII when a transgendered employee suffers an adverse employment action. This development is grounded in the Supreme Court's decision in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 420 U.S. 228 (1989), the case that found sex stereotyping can violate Title VII. Recently, in Smith v. City of Salem, Ohio, 369 F.3d 912 (6th Cir. 2004), the Sixth Circuit used the Price Waterhouse analysis to hold that a transitioning pre-operative transsexual could proceed with his claim of sex discrimination both because of sex stereotyping and because transgendered individuals are covered under the Act.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.