Posted by admin

Ingram v. PG&E

District Court refuses to allow jurors to decide if race played a factor in disciplines, wherein supervisor refused to give African-American employees positive recognitions and reserved the harshest disciplines for African-American employees. The supervisor faced multiple complaints of race discrimination and disavowed knowledge of what race was during his deposition.

Posted by admin

Cooper v. United Airlines

Former Police Officer hired at United as Security Officer and promoted to Supervisor of Security Officer after the tragic events of September 11, 2001 sued United Airlines for discrimination in pay and retaliation. Plaintiff alleges that during her time as a Security Officer she was paid less than her male counterparts for similar work. After Plaintiff complained of unfair pay she was quickly demoted from her Supervisor position after over a decade in the position. Plaintiff opposes United’s request to preclude a jury from considering her claims.

Posted by admin

Henry v. UCSF

Smith Patten files Reply brief in Appeal involving case wherein a UCSF supervisor hung a noose in the workplace after his African American subordinate blew the whistle regarding illegal conduct of supervisors. An appeal was filed because the District Court found that a jury should not be allowed to decide if UCSF is liable for race harassment and retaliation.

Posted by admin

Veloz v. PG&E

Smith Patten files Reply brief in Appeal involving case wherein PG&E utilized corporate security to follow employee who requested FMLA leave. Smith Patten argues that jurors should not be precluded from reviewing PG&E’s use of corporate security for improper covert operations.