On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision clarifying the evidentiary standard for Title VII disparate treatment claims. The Court held that plaintiffs who are members of a majority group—such as heterosexuals, men, or whites—are not required to meet a heightened evidentiary burden to establish a prima facie case of discrimination.
Texas Commission on Human Rights Act Does Not Shield Employees from Common Law Tort Claims Made by their Co-workers
The case arose from a dispute involving an SMU professor who alleged she was denied tenure due to discrimination and retaliation. In addition to statutory discrimination and retaliation claims against the University, she brought common law claims for defamation and fraud against individual co-workers, based on statements and actions taken during the tenure review process.
U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies Burden of Proof for Employer to Prove Exempt Status
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that “the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard applies when an employer seeks to prove that an employee is exempt from the minimum-wage and overtime-pay provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).” The Court reversed the Fourth Circuit, which had affirmed the District Court’s use of the “clear-and-convincing-evidence standard” in favor
U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies When Job Transfers May Violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a Title VII plaintiff challenging a job transfer that was allegedly ordered because of her sex but did not result in a decrease in pay or benefits may still state a claim for relief if she can show the transfer brought about some harm with respect to an
U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies “Cost” Burden for Employer Showing of Undue Hardship under Title VII
In an important case, the U.S. Supreme Court recently clarified generally the costs or expenditures an employer would have to incur before it can show that a particular accommodation of religious beliefs constitutes undue hardship under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. In a unanimous opinion, the Court held that an employer denying a
Texas Supreme Court Holds Morbid Obesity, Unconnected to Physiological Disorder or Condition, Is Not a Disability
In a rare employment case issuing from the Texas Supreme Court, the Court held that morbid obesity, without some evidence that it is caused by an underlying physiological disorder or condition, does not qualify as a disability under state ant-discrimination laws. The case arose following the termination of a medical resident who was employed by
NLRB Finds Nondisparagement and Confidentiality Provisions Found in Many Severance Agreements Unlawful
A recent decision of the National Labor Relations Board (the “Board”) concluded that standard nondisparagement and confidentiality provisions found in many employee severance agreements violate federal labor law because they have a reasonable tendency to interfere with and restrain employees’ prospective rights to engage in protected concerted activity, bargain collectively and form unions for their
Fifth Circuit Remands Title VII Case to Consider if EEOC’s Two Right to Sue Notices Misled Employee
Employees bringing claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act must exhaust their administrative remedies with the EEOC prior to filing suit against an employer. These administrative remedies include timely filing charge of discrimination, obtaining a right to sue letter and timely
Day Rate Compensation Insufficient to Satisfy Salary Basis Test for Executive Exemptions says U.S. Supreme Court
A recent United States Supreme Court decision provided two reminders for employers utilizing a day-rate compensation scheme. First, employers must pay their day-rate employees overtime or risk potential liability under the FLSA. Second, employers cannot shield themselves from FLSA overtime liability by directing the Court to only their annualized compensation of employees or their job
Employers Not Ordinarily Required to Provide Competition-Free Transfers to Disabled Employees as Reasonable Accommodation Absent Special Circumstances Says Fifth Circuit
In a significant case involving an employer’s obligation to transfer a disabled employee, who cannot perform the essential functions of the employee’s current position, to an open, vacant position, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that an employer’s policy of hiring the most qualified candidate to fill vacant positions need not be ignored by