By Minh N. Vu
Seyfarth Synopsis: UC Berkeley and the DOJ resolve an 8-year investigation with a comprehensive Consent Decree that requires UC Berkeley to make virtually all the content on its online platforms accessible to people with disabilities within three years and adopt comprehensive policies and procedures to ensure accessible online content.
After eight years, the U.S. Department
Continue Reading UC Berkeley Enters Into Consent Decree with DOJ About Its Websites and Other Online Content
Seyfarth Synopsis: Employers can take precaution against discrimination claims by ensuring they have legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasoning for their decision-making. An honest explanation of their behavior makes it credible.
Seyfarth Synopsis: On July 14, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment in an Americans With Disabilities Act discrimination and retaliation case filed by an employee with multiple sclerosis. In rejecting the plaintiff’s claims, the Court’s decision points to the importance of employers having
Seyfarth Synopsis: In a recent ruling,
Seyfarth Synopsis: On May 31, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment in the employer’s favor on Title VII race discrimination and work retaliation claims filed by a Black dental assistant. In rejecting the plaintiff’s claims, the Court highlights the importance of documenting employee
Seyfarth Synopsis: On April 14, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Seyfarth Synopsis: Following the March 8, 2021 Executive Order establishing the White House Gender Policy Council, on October 22, 2021 the White House released the first-ever U.S. Government National Strategy on Gender Equity and Equality. The EEOC contributed to the Strategy and supports its full implementation, suggesting that gender-related issues –
Seyfarth Synopsis: The New Jersey Supreme Court held that a plaintiff need not plead an adverse employment action such as a termination or demotion to establish a prima facie case of failure to accommodate a disability under New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination (“LAD”).