No. 20-56

Wen Chiann Yeh v. North Carolina State University, et al.

Lower Court: Fourth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-07-22
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Tags: adverse-employment-action civil-rights civil-rights-act employment-discrimination faragher-ellerth faragher-ellerth-rule supervisor-liability title-vii
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity ERISA EmploymentDiscrimina
Latest Conference: 2020-09-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Faragher and Ellerth 'supervisor' liability rule applies to discrimination and harassment by those whom the employer vests with authority to direct and oversee their victim's daily work

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED ' , I. Weather, as the Second, Fourth, and Ninth Circuits have held, the Faragher and Ellerth “supervisor” liability rule (i) applies to discrimination, harassment by those whom the employer vests with authority to direct and oversee their victim’s daily work, or (ii). Is limited to those harassers who have the power to “hire, fire, demote, promote, transfer, or discipline” their victim. ll. Whether discrimination against an employee because of racial orientation constitutes prohibited employment discrimination ‘because of ... sex, nationality, race’ within the : meaning of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.” . It. Whether The Court decided that an employer may be liable for sexual and racial discrimination and wrongdoing caused by a supervisor, but liability depends on the ; reasonableness of the employer's conduct, as well as the reasonableness of the plaintiff victim's conduct. : IV. Whether this court enacted in the Civil Rights Act of 1866 to allow Plaintiff to recover by showing that race was merely a “motivating factor” in a defense decision. . : V. Whether Discovery evidences are sufficient intervening circumstance of case that allows ae the use of evidence found in accordance with the law. : : Vi. Whether The Court enacted the so-called “equal protection clause” of the 14th Amendment, which holds that no state can “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” . Vil. Whether The Court enacted the Judges recuse themselves by “The Due Process clauses : of the United States Constitution” and “judges' bias taints a case”, “has a financial interest in the case's outcome”. VIII. Whether twice now in the context of Federal anti-discrimination laws, this court has . instructed that the rule of but-for causation is the “default rule []” against which Congress is presumed to legislate. 2 . .

Docket Entries

2020-10-05
Petition DENIED.
2020-09-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-07-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 21, 2020)

Attorneys

Wen Chiann Yeh
Wen Chiann Yeh — Petitioner
Wen Chiann Yeh — Petitioner