Some of the case digests do not have a link to the full opinion.
• Most Federal District Court opinions can be accessed via PACER. Registration is required; nominal fees
• BNA arbitration awards can be obtained for a fee, from BNA Plus
• Some of our links are to cases on the FindLaw website. Registration is required; no fees.

Defamation

     The Chief Deputy Register of Deeds fr a county sought an interim appointment from the governor for the Register when that position, normally elected, became vacant. After the governor's appointment secretary interviewed her, he became aware that she was involved in a personal bankruptcy and informed her that she would not be appointed. She alleged that the governor's official spokesman and the governor defamed her by publically making statements that she was not appointed because she was in a bankruptcy proceeding. She asserted claims for violation of privacy rights, employment rights, and bankruptcy discrimination under 11 U.S.C. Sec. 525(a). A federal appeals court found that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on both her privacy and equal protection claims. Chasensky v. Walker, #13-1761, 2014 U.S. App. Lexis 1160 (7th Cir.).

Disability Rights and Benefits - Other Issues

     A deputy sheriff injured on the job had previously worked nights and received a shift differential in his pay. While off work following the injury, his regular pay, including the shift differential, continued. When he returned to work, returning on modified duty, he was put on the day shift and no longer paid the shift differential. He claimed that this violated the terms of a California state statute under which public employees who become disabled from an on-the-job injury and they go on a leave of absence are guaranteed no loss of pay. Rejecting this argument, an intermediate California appeals court pointed out that the employee was not now on a leave of absence, so the statute did not apply. County of Nevada v. WCAB, #C074133, 2014 Cal. App. Lexis 92.

Fair Labor Standards Act - In General

****Editor's Case Alert****

     Employees who work at steel plants sued their employer under the Fair Labor Standards Act, seeking overtime pay for additional time they spent putting on and taking off protective gear required by their employer because of workplace hazards. While such time is otherwise compensable, the employer argued that it was able to regard it as non-compensable under the terms of a collective bargaining agreement with the employee's union. 29 U.S.C. Sec. 203(o) allows for collective bargaining as to whether time spent "changing clothes" or washing at the beginning or end of the workday was paid work time. The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously agreed, ruling that the protective gear involved amounted to "clothes," even if it was indispensable for performing the work. The time spent putting on earplugs and safety glasses was minimal, so that even if they were not "clothes," the time period involved could fairly be labeled time spent changing clothes or washing. The employees were not entitled to overtime for the time. Sandifer v. United States Steel Corp., #12-417, 2014 U.S. Lexis 799.

Family, Medical & Personal Leave

****Editor's Case Alert****

     A public employee's mother was diagnosed with end-stage heart failure. The employee acted as her mother's caregiver, administering insulin, draining fluid from her heart, and bathing and dressing her. The employee requested unpaid leave from her job to accompany her dying mother on a six-day trip to Las Vegas to fulfill her dying mother's lifelong dream. The employer denied the request, but the employee claimed that she was not notified of the denial before going on the trip. Months after the trip, the employer terminated the employee for alleged unauthorized absences during the trip. A federal appeals court upheld a trial court's ruling in favor of the terminated employee on a claim under the Family and Medical Leave Act, authorizing unpaid leave to care for relatives, including a parent with a serious health condition. The lower court had stated that "where the care takes place has no bearing on" protection for family leave under the statute, and denied summary judgment to the employer. Ballard v. Chicago Park Dist., #13-1445, 2014 U.S. App. Lexis 1747 (7th Cir.).

Pensions

     A state employee retired from his job as an investigator for the Secretary of State and a state employee retirement system approved his pension amount. They later notified him that an error hade been made in calculating his pension amount and that the overpayment would be recouped and the monthly benefit reduced. He challenged the reduction. An intermediate state appeals court found that the system lacked the statutory authority to correct errors in pension calculations after the elapse of a 35 day period authorized by a state Administrative Review Law. Sharp v. The Board of Trustees of the State Employees' Retirement System, #4-13-0125, 2014 IL App (4th) 130125. 2014 Ill. App. Lexis 2.

Political Activity

     A former fire captain claimed that his termination was an act of political discrimination in violation of his First Amendment rights in retaliation for his support for a candidate for Fire Commissioner. A federal appeals court rejected this claim, finding that the employer gave legitimate business-related reasons for their personnel decisions, including a new familial relations policy forbidding officers from working shifts with or supervising their family members, such as the plaintiff's wife, a full time firefighter, and that the employee failed to show that the reasons given were pretexts. Pierce v. Cotuit Fire District, #13-1428, 2014 U.S. App. Lexis 1746 (1st Cir.).

Race Discrimination - In General

     A longtime Hispanic employee of a county road commission claimed that he had been subjected to a pervasive atmosphere of racial insensitivity and derogatory comments. He applied for a specific promotion and did not receive it. He was later involuntarily transferred to the position he had previously applied for but without the raise he had requested for the job because of its hazardous conditions. He was given low evaluations after being placed in the job and developed health problems because of job conditions. He took an eight-month family and medical leave act leave after suffering a mental breakdown, and when his psychiatrist indicated that he could return to work, he was terminated. A federal appeals court overturned the trial court determination that he had not suffered an adverse employment action. It found that there was sufficient proof of conditions that could support a claim of discrimination. It also specifically held that the mere fact that he had previously applied for the job that he was later involuntarily transferred to did not bar him from trying to establish that the transfer was adverse. Deleon v. Kalamazoo Cnty. Road Comm'n, #12-2377, 2014 U.S. App. Lexis 681, 2014 Fed App. 12P (6th Cir.).

     A county employee claimed that he was subjected to discrimination in employment on the basis of a desire to interfere with his intimate relationship with a black woman who he, a white man, was engaged to. His relationship was entitled to protection as part of his constitutional right of association, and the employer had no legitimate interest in interfering. Because that constitutional right was not clearly established, however, the individual defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. An award of $304,775 in back pay against the employer was upheld based on unlawful termination, and the violation of constitutional rights. Punitive damage awards against the individual defendants were overturned. The claim was not based on racial discrimination but rather interference with a protected intimate relationship. Matusick v. Erie County Water Authority, #11-1234, 739 F.3d 51 (2nd Cir. 2014).

Retirement Rights and Benefits

     A California city put a cap on retired city workers' health benefits after it failed to reach an agreement with the employee union. An intermediate state court rejected a retiree's claim that the cap on her health benefits was unlawful. The retiree health benefits were an employment benefit not a benefit under the city's retirement system, and therefore restrictions in the city charter that required a majority vote by all members of the pension system before any reduction in retirement system benefits took place did not apply. Dailey v. City of San Diego, #D060049, 2013 Cal. App. Lexis 1082, ordered published 2014.

Workers' Compensation

     A salaried police officer in California injured his left foot and heel while on the job. He claimed that the plain language of a state statute entitled industrially injured officers to temporary disability benefits at the maximum rate. An intermediate state appeals court rejected that claim, finding that the statute at issue only appled to volunteer police officers. Larkin v. WCAB, #C065891, 2014 Cal. App. Lexis 78.

• Contents menu.

• Report non-working links here

Reference:

• Abbreviations of laws, law reports and agencies used in our publications.
• AELE’s list of employment law resources

Report non-working links here

AELE Seminars:

Lethal and Less Lethal Force
Oct. 13-15, 2014 – Orleans Hotel, Las Vegas

Public Safety Discipline and Internal Investigations
Dec. 15-17, 2014 – Orleans Hotel, Las Vegas

 Search the Case Law Digest