Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Former "Jeopardy!" and "Wheel of Fortune" staffers have filed employment discrimination, harassment and retaliation complaints against Sony Pictures Entertainment after the Culver City-based ...
October 4, 2024: January 21, 2025 Medical Marijuana, Inc. v. Horn: 23-365: Whether economic harms resulting from personal injuries are injuries to "business or property by reason of" the defendant's acts for purposes of a civil treble-damages action under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. April 29, 2024: October 15, 2024
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores , 575 U.S. 768 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case regarding a Muslim American woman, Samantha Elauf, who was refused a job at Abercrombie & Fitch in 2008 because she wore a headscarf, which conflicted with the company's dress code. [ 1 ]
Game show executives tolerated a toxic environment where staffers made disparaging remarks about Black contestants, two former employees allege. 'Jeopardy', 'Wheel of Fortune' under fire: Game ...
The lawsuit González v.Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., No. 3:03-cv-02817, filed in June 2003, alleged that the nationwide retailer Abercrombie & Fitch "violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by maintaining recruiting and hiring practice that excluded minorities and women and adopting a restrictive marketing image, and other policies, which limited minority and female employment."
Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020), is a landmark [1] United States Supreme Court civil rights decision in which the Court held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees against discrimination because of sexuality or gender identity.
The case was heard on October 8, 2019, alongside two other cases, Bostock v. Clayton County and Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda which dealt with Title VII protection related to sexual orientation. The Court ruled in a 6–3 decision under Bostock but covering all three cases on June 15, 2020, that Title VII protection extends to gay and ...
The Court accepted the EEOC’s test for determining whether a filing constituted a charge as set forth in its amicus curiae brief as well as internal directives, and decided: “In addition to the information required by the regulations, i.e., an allegation and the name of the charged party, if a filing is to be deemed a charge it must be ...