The newsletter of the ISBA’s Section on Federal Civil Practice
Browse articles by year: 2014 (4)
Newsletter articles from 2004
Arbitrator had authority to decide Family Medical Leave Act issues
In Butler Manufacturing Co. v. United Steelworkers of America, 336 F.3d 627 (7th Cir. 2003), Butler, the employer, brought an action to vacate an arbitration award entered pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement ("CBA") between Butler and the United Steelworkers of America ("Union").
Maynard v. Nygren, No. 03-3436 (7th Cir. 6/22/04). Maynard brought this claim against McHenry County Sheriff Keith Nygren alleging failure to accommodate under the ADA. Maynard was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in February 1996.
Melissa Robinson brought this cause of action for hostile work environment, sexual harassment and constructive discharge pursuant to Title VII against Macon County and State Court Judge Warren A. Sappington. T
The decisions of the courts, especially in the employment area, have been many. So many in fact that a single issue of the newsletter could not be large enough to bring them to you.
The frequency of discovery abuses, intentional or otherwise, under the federal rules of civil procedure appear to be on the rise, causing consternation for practitioners and judges alike.
The challenges of e-discovery
The evolving arena of electronic discovery presents significant challenges and a wide-array of potential abuses.
Comments from the chair
It is an exciting time for attorneys in the Federal Courts. We are facing our newest challenge. Electronic filing is here for some of us and close for the rest.
Discovery abuses in the federal system
The Federal Civil Practice Section is directed to raise issues of immediacy of federal practice and then provide necessary, timely, and hopefully rewarding assistance to the lawyer that practices in the federal courts within any of the three districts of Illinois.
The Federal Court will soon go “paperless”
The United States District and Bankruptcy Courts in Illinois, and throughout the nation, are converting to a new "paperless" case management and electronic case filing system.
A plaintiff need not present direct evidence of discrimination to get a mixed-motive jury instruction
Plaintiffs' employment lawyers are hailing the 2003 United States Supreme Court decision Desert Palace v. Costa, 539 U.S. _____, 123 S. Ct. 2148 (2003) and, just as they did over a decade ago when the Court handed down Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228, 109 S. Ct. 1775 (1989), and when Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1991, hope that it provides a long-awaited breakthrough in employment discrimination law that will fundamentally alter the playing field which they have traditionally viewed as overwhelmingly favoring employers.
Restriction of litigants’ access to protected health information under HIPAA
Regulations issued by the Secretary of Health and Human Services under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ("HIPAA") prohibit covered entities-health plans, health care clearinghouses and health care providers-from using or disclosing protected health information ("PHI") without the consent of the individual who is the subject of the information, unless such use or disclosure is specifically permitted by the regulations.
Senior status" for the federal judge is a label that covers a multitude of sins-at least as long as the sins don't collide with the constitutional guaranty that provides judges with tenure only "during good behavior."
The Southern District goes electronic!
I hope that the first time you hear about the Southern District of Illinois' electronic filing system is not by receiving a "Notice of Return of Document for Failure to Electronically File Document."
Supreme Court in review
The following is a summary of the seven employment law cases decided by the U.S. Supreme Court during its 2002-2003 term.
What is necessary to establish that an individual has a disability?
In Poor v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. (Central District, Case No, 00-2321), the court issued a decision on a motion for summary judgment in a case under the Americans with Disabilities Act that provides an excellent text for anyone practicing or wishing to practice in the area of disability discrimination.