Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 03 JUNE 2014

US Employment Litigation Round-Up For May 2014

Mayer Brown
Mayer Brown
Contributor
Mayer Brown

Mayer Brown

Mayer Brown is a leading international law firm positioned to represent the world’s major...

View firm profile
Explore more from Mayer Brown

The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in EEOC v. Kaplan Higher Education Corp. reinforced the Federal Rules of Evidence requirement that each part of a proposed expert’s methodology be reliable in order for the expert’s testimony to be admissible.

United StatesEmployment and HR

Keywords: EEOC, Federal Rules of Evidence, pre-employment credit checks, Costco workers, NLRB

A Review of Key Cases and New Laws Affecting Employers

Sixth Circuit Excludes EEOC's Unreliable Disparate Impact Expert

Decision: The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in EEOC v. Kaplan Higher Education Corp. reinforced the Federal Rules of Evidence requirement that each part of a proposed expert's methodology be reliable in order for the expert's testimony to be admissible.

The EEOC's lawsuit against Kaplan alleged that Kaplan's use of pre-employment credit checks caused it to reject more African-American applicants than white applicants, creating a disparate impact in violation of Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act. To support its claim, the EEOC offered expert testimony in the form of statistical analysis that purportedly demonstrated the disparate impact. Because information about the race of the applicants was not available, the EEOC's expert

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from