Search results
MULDROW v. CITY OF ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI, ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No. 22–193. Argued December 6, 2023—Decided April 17, 2024. Sergeant Jatonya Clayborn Muldrow maintains that her employer, the St. Louis Police Department, transferred her from one job to another because she is a woman.
Apr 19, 2024 · The Supreme Court’s April 17, 2024 decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri rejected the “materially significant disadvantage” standard frequently applied by federal courts in determining the extent of harm necessary for an employee to establish that a job transfer is an adverse employment action for purposes of Title VII of the ...
Apr 17, 2024 · The court issued a ruling in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis holding that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act bars employers from discriminating in decisions like lateral transfers, without requiring employees to show that the discriminatory decision caused “significant” disadvantage.
Apr 17, 2024 · On April 17, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri , No. 22-193, holding that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discriminatory job transfers that cause some harm with respect to an identifiable term or condition of employment, but the transferee need not show the harm was significant.
Apr 20, 2024 · What the Supreme Court is saying is that we are bound by the plain meaning of the words in the statute and that courts err when they attempt to graft in requirements not supported by the text. This is good for the rule of law because it promotes transparency and predictability. The case is Muldrow v.
- Of Counsel, Wimberly, Lawson, Steckel
- Schneider & Stine P.C.
Apr 26, 2024 · On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, et al., No. 22-193, authored by Justice Elena Kagan. In a unanimous decision, with Justices Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh separately concurring, the Court vacated a holding by the Eighth Circuit and remanded the case for further consideration.
People also ask
When was Muldrow v City of St Louis decided?
Does Muldrow v City of St Louis apply to other employment actions?
Why did the city of St Louis and Captain Deeba file a motion for summary judgment?
Did St Louis violate Title VII by denying a transfer request?
Dec 6, 2023 · The district court granted the City of St. Louis and Captain Deeba's motion for summary judgment, finding in favor of the City of St. Louis on Sergeant Muldrow's Title VII claims and simultaneously dismissing her state law claims against the City of St. Louis and Captain Deeba.
