loader
Page is loading...
generic_insight_detail

Court Tells Skydiver’s Estate It Won’t Reconsider Title VII Claim


On April 18, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit declined to reconsider the estate of deceased skydiver Donald Zarda’s Title VII claim against former employer Altitude Express. Zarda filed suit claiming his employment was terminated because of his sexual orientation. Although his New York state law claim was explicitly based on sexual orientation, his Title VII claim was characterized as a sex discrimination claim. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York granted summary judgment to Altitude Express on Zarda’s Title VII claim, consistent with the Second Circuit’s 2000 Simonton v. Runyon holding that Title VII does not prohibit sexual orientation discrimination. On appeal, the court held that a plaintiff may make a sex discrimination claim based on unlawful sex stereotypes, but that Zarda failed to make this argument at the district court level. The court declined to entertain the argument that Simonton should be overturned, as the panel cannot overturn a previous panel’s decision. The estate’s attorney indicated he will petition for an en banc rehearing, the only avenue for the Second Circuit to overrule the Simonton precedent and consider anew whether Title VII prohibits discrimination based on an employee’s sexual orientation. The case is Zarda v. Altitude Express, No. 15-3775.


LEAVE YOUR COMMENT

RELATED ARTICLES

Big Changes For Illinois Employers: Workplace Transparency Act

September 24, 2019 | Currents - Employment Law, Workplace Culture and Conduct

Navigating Discrimination Claims With Strong Documentation

September 6, 2019 | Currents - Employment Law, Employment Discrimination

Illinois EPA Amendment Lowers Standard For Discrimination Claims

August 8, 2019 | Currents - Employment Law, Employment Discrimination

Divided SCOTUS Affirms Auer Deference to Agencies’ Interpretations

July 3, 2019 | Currents - Employment Law, Supreme Court Watch

Misidentification of Employer in Discrimination Charge Not Enough for Dismissal

June 14, 2019 | Currents - Employment Law, Employment Discrimination

Subscribe

Do you want to receive more valuable insights directly in your inbox? Visit our subscription center and let us know what you're interested in learning more about.

View Subscription Center
RELATED TOPICS
Discrimination
sexual orientation discrimination
Title VII
Trending Connect
We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By clicking any link on this page you are giving your consent for us to use cookies.