Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 02 JULY 2010

Supreme Court Docket Report - June 29, 2010

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

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a), makes it illegal to retaliate against an employee for (a) opposing an unlawful employment practice or (b) participating in an investigation of, or proceedings against, an employer under the Act.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Originally published June 29, 2010

Keywords: Civil Rights Act 1964, anti-retaliation, Thompson v. North American Stainless, EEOC, discrimination, Bayh-Dole Act, invention,

Today the Supreme Court granted certiorari in one case of interest to the business community:

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act—Retaliation Claims

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a), makes it illegal to retaliate against an employee for (a) opposing an unlawful employment practice or (b) participating in an investigation of, or proceedings against, an employer under the Act. The Supreme Court granted certiorari today in Thompson v. North American Stainless, LP, No. 09-291, to determine whether Title VII's anti-retaliation provision protects an individual who suffers retaliation based solely upon that individual's association with an employee who has engaged in protected activities.

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