Marcia Washkuhn

(402) 231-8763
Partner
(402) 346-1148 Fax
Marcia.Washkuhn@KutakRock.com
July 25, 2017

Recently the Massachusetts Supreme Court became the first court in the nation to hold that an employer cannot summarily terminate an employee for off-duty use of marijuana for medical purposes where such use is legal under state law.

Article
April 6, 2017

In a landmark decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit became the first federal appellate court in the country to hold that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects against workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Client Alert
April 29, 2016
April 18, 2016

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently held that obesity is not a “disability” under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) unless it is caused by a physiological disorder or condition.

Client Alert
April 14, 2016
July 8, 2015

On August 30, 2015, the Nebraska Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which amends the Nebraska Fair Employment Practice Act, will go into effect.

The new law essentially requires employers to treat pregnancy-related limitations in the same manner as physical limitations stemming from disability. Requested reasonable accommodations are required unless they would impose an undue hardship on the employer. For more information, please read our client alert

Article
July 2, 2015

On June 25, 2015, the EEOC issued updated enforcement guidelines regarding the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Young v. United Parcel Services, Inc., 135 S. Ct. 1338 (2015). In Young, the Court declined to give special, controlling weight to the July 2014 EEOC guidelines, finding the guidance was inconsistent with the EEOC’s prior positions, and the EEOC did not explain the basis for the guidance. For additional information, please read our client alert.

Client Alert
July 1, 2013

On Monday, June 24, 2013, a sharply divided Supreme Court made it harder for employees to win discrimination and retaliation suits against their employers. In a pair of 5-4 decisions, the Court limited how juries can decide retaliation lawsuits, requiring victims to prove employers would not have taken action against them “but-for” their intention to retaliate. The Court also held a person must be able to hire and fire someone to be considered a supervisor in discrimination lawsuits.

Client Alert
May 10, 2013
On March 27, 2013, in a 5-4 decision of a very divided bench, the U.S. Supreme Court held plaintiffs in a class action must demonstrate damages attributable to a class-wide injury may be measured on a class-wide basis to qualify for certification.
Client Alert
May 10, 2013
12