Details: University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v.
In the summer of 2013, the Supreme Court ruled on University of Texas Southwest Medical Center v. Nassar, and, in doing so, the Court established a higher burden of proof for plaintiffs bringing claims for discrimination on the basis of retaliation.
University of Texas Southwest Medical Center v. Nassar (2013) Nassar (2013) The Supreme Court handed employers a 5-4 win in the Nassar case, determining that a worker bringing a Title VII retaliation claim must show that retaliation was the “but for” cause of an adverse employment action — meaning that the alleged retaliation wouldn’t have occurred absent an improper motive on the.
FBL Financial Services, Inc. and University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar in applying but-for causation requirements to state employment discrimination statutes, including age discrimination and retaliation statutes analogous to those at issue in Gross and Nassar.
The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center is a public medical school in Dallas, Texas. With approximately 13,568 employees and 2,445 faculty and ov.
The verdict in Naiel Nassar, M.D. v. University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, et al., No. 3:08-cv-1337, was reached May 26, 2010, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
In the second case, the court threw out a discrimination lawsuit that a physician won against the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. Naiel Nassar claimed that a job offer was.
The Supreme Court, in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, had to decide whether both types of claims, retaliation claims and status based claims, should have the same causation standard. A divided Supreme Court concluded that, despite being part of the same statute, retaliation claims must still be proven “according to traditional principles of but-for causation, not.