Publications
Third Circuit adopts “proxy-liability” exception to Faragher-Ellerth defense.
The plaintiff sued her employer, asserting sexual harassment claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (PHRA).
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.
Third Circuit holds deductions in paid time off do not equate to improper deductions in salary under the FLSA.
The plaintiff and several co-plaintiffs filed a collective action and putative class action, alleging that their employer made improper deductions from their accumulated paid time off (PTO) in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Acts (FLSA).
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.
Third Circuit finds that four to six weeks between an employee’s internal complaint and his termination is “not unduly suggestive” of retaliatory animus under Title VII.
The plaintiff sued his employer alleging, inter alia, that he was terminated in retaliation for reporting sexual misconduct at work in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.
Third Circuit maintains a high bar for use of witness affidavits to defeat summary judgment.
The plaintiff sued her employer, alleging that they had violated her rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (PHRA) and the Philadelphia Fair Practices Ordinance (PFPO).
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.
Even if at work, dressed for work and wearing a work badge, an employee is not thought to be acting within the scope of his or her employment if not on duty on the employer’s behalf when the incident occurs.
The Third District affirmed the trial court’s decision to enter summary judgment in favor of the employer. One of the employer’s employees, Maria Rosario, hit the plaintiff with her shopping cart at approximately 5:29 PM.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.
Despite documentary evidence, insured’s testimony alone is sufficient to create an issue of fact to defeat summary judgment in an uninsured motorist case.
The defendant insurance carrier filed a motion for summary judgment as to the plaintiff/insured’s breach of contract cause of action arising from his claim for uninsured motorist benefits.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.
The grounds on which a plaintiff may pursue a malpractice claim against an attorney with whom there was no attorney-client relationship are exceedingly narrow.
The New Jersey Appellate Division affirmed a decision dismissing a complex legal malpractice action arising out of an underlying first-party coverage action in the U.S.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.
The Dragonetti Act provision that provides for an award of punitive damages does not violate Pennsylvania’s Constitution.
The Pennsylvania Superior Court, in a non-precedential decision, has upheld a verdict in which a jury awarded a plaintiff punitive damages in a wrongful use of civil proceedings action brought under 42 Pa. C.S. §8351, et seq. (Dragonetti Act).
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.
Jail officer’s knowledge of a potential policy violation by a medical care contractor was not enough to prove knowledge of a substantial risk of a constitutional violation under 42 USC section 1983.
A jail officer was present outside of a privacy curtain while a male medical care contractor was providing medical care to a female inmate in the absence of a chaperone, which was contrary to policy.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.
Vague assertions that existing policies were inadequate are not enough to impose Monell municipal liability.
This federal civil rights and employment discrimination action was brought by the plaintiff, a correctional officer employed at Luzerne County Correctional Facility (LCCF), against her employer, Luzerne County, and two of her supervisors, one of w
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers.