McGhee v. Pathmark Stores, Inc., No. ATL-L-2459-08 (Law Div., August 23, 2010) – A New Jersey trial court has ruled that the plaintiffs in an LAD case seeking emotional distress damages cannot be forced to undergo psychological examinations. The defendant sought to have the plaintiffs examined to rebut their claims of anxiety and high blood pressure resulting from alleged racial harassment. Atlantic County Superior Court Judge Joseph Kane held that the LAD has been liberally construed to create an expansive remedy, and that emotional distress is a “recognized byproduct of discrimination” under the statute. The judge therefore found that the plaintiffs did not put their mental state “at issue” when they alleged pain and suffering as a component of damages. As this decision comes from a trial level court, it is not binding on any other courts.
The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has indicated that it will further expand its use of “integrity” measures in the permanent labor certification program. These measures include the conduct of audit investigations and DOL-supervised recruitments of Program Electronic Review Management (PERM) cases submitted to the DOL. Increased Processing Times and Denials The…..
Noel v. The Boeing Co., 2010 WL 3817090 (3d Cir., October 1, 2010) – In a case of first impression, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a failure to promote does not, in itself, constitute discrimination in compensation, and that the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 (FPA) therefore does not apply
In a big win for Starbucks and all other restauranteurs, retailers, and places of public accommodation, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held in three related cases (Johnson v. Starbuck Corp., Lindsay v. Starbucks Corp., and Kong v. Starbucks Corp.) that accessible sales and service counters are not required to provide a minimum of 36 inches of usable counter space for disabled patrons, provided that the counter is no more than 36 inches high.