The EEOC’s Most Important Brief Of The Year Filed With The U.S. Supreme Court – The Lines Are Drawn In The Mach Mining Appeal

The EEOC’s Most Important Brief Of The Year Filed With The U.S. Supreme Court – The Lines Are Drawn In The Mach Mining Appeal

October 28, 2014

By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. and Rebecca Bjork Yesterday evening the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed its Reply Brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in Mach Mining v. EEOC, Case No. 13-1019. It draws the battle lines for the upcoming oral argument before the SCOTUS in January of 2015. Given the importance of this case and the issue presented, the Commission’s pleading is well worth a read. The Context Mach Mining v. EEOC is…

The EEOC’s Most Important Brief Of The Year Filed With The U.S. Supreme Court – The Lines Are Drawn In The Mach Mining Appeal

October 28, 2014

Court Denies Class Certification In Race Discrimination Case Against The Fed

By Rebecca S. Bjork & Gerald Maatman, Jr.

October 2, 2014

By Rebecca S. Bjork and Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. After Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011), class action litigants are re-booting their theories in employment discrimination class actions. The stakes are high and the legal theories are novel in these workplace class actions, especially when an employer’s decision-making processes – either objective, subjective, or both – are challenged. Most recently, Judge Emmet Sullivan of the U.S. District Court for the District…

Different Experiences Of Navy Chaplains Doom Effort To Certify A Rule 23 Class For “Institutional Reform” In Workplace Bias Case

Consumer Class Defense Blog

September 5, 2014

Sometimes, class certification decisions read to us like checklists, where a judge will recite line and verse the requirements under Rule 23 one by one, and often find that all of them are satisfied with little discussion of the evidentiary basis for the rulings. At other times, however, a decision will be released that represents a more nuanced and fully-reasoned analysis of not only the requirements of the rule and its sub-parts, but also…

Supreme Court Receives Petitioner’s Brief and Eight Supporting Briefs In Significant Class Action Involving “Unsettled Question” of Whether Tolling Applies to a Statute of Repose.

By Esther Slater McDonald & Rebecca S. Bjork

June 24, 2014

Background In March, the Supreme Court granted certiorari to determine whether the filing of a putative class action serves, under the American Pipe rule, to satisfy the three-year time limitation in § 13 of the Securities Act with respect to the claims of putative class members. Now, the Court is beginning to consider the merits. The Court’s ruling may have implications for any class action claim subject to a statute of repose. This case involved…

Certification Of Damages Issues – Really?

By Rebecca S. Bjork & Gerald Maatman, Jr.

September 5, 2013

By Rebecca Bjork and Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. Workplace class actions are being reshaped before our very eyes, as district courts across the country apply important new Supreme Court decisions. A new noteworthy ruling illustrating this trend in the context of Rule 23(b)(3) requirements is from a long-running employment discrimination case in New York entitled Gulino, et al. v. The Bd. of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of N.Y., No. 96…

UPDATED – Remanded For Reconsideration In Light Of What Decision, Now, Exactly?

By Rebecca S. Bjork & Gerald Maatman, Jr.

August 29, 2013

By Rebecca Bjork and Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. To reach a decision it issued on August 22, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit was required to read some serious Supreme Court tea leaves and we found the results to be pretty interesting. In Butler v. Sears, Roebuck and Co., No. 11-8029 (7th Cir. Aug. 22, 2013), the Seventh Circuit reinstated its earlier order allowing certification of a class action involving allegations…

The EEOC Wins A Round In Its Discovery Tug-Of-War In EEOC v. Freeman

December 24, 2012

By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. and Rebecca Bjork In EEOC v. Freeman, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179183, at *6 (D. Md. Dec. 19, 2012), Magistrate Judge Day of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland noted that “there simply is no more aggravating action than a lawyer improperly instructing a deponent not to answer a question.” Nevertheless, in the most recent deposition in EEOC v. Freeman, the EEOC continuously instructed its representative in a…

District Court Grants The EEOC Summary Judgment In Its Age Discrimination Claim Against Baltimore County’s Pension Plan

October 26, 2012

Although claims against pension plans are unique and involve challenging issues, the EEOC has shown no reluctance in filing systemic suits alleging that provisions in public employers’ retirement plans are discriminatory. The most recent activity in the EEOC’s series of systemic suits involves EEOC v. Baltimore County, et al., No. 07-CV-2500 (D. Md. Oct. 16, 2012). In EEOC v. Baltimore County, the EEOC alleged that the County’s pension plan, known as the Employee Retirement System (“ERS”),…

Second Circuit Rejects The EEOC’s Broad Injunction Requests