No. 24-5522

Billie R. James v. Southland Casino

Lower Court: Eighth Circuit
Docketed: 2024-09-11
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: age-discrimination civil-rights employment-law prima-facie-case procedural-fairness summary-judgment
Key Terms:
Arbitration ERISA
Latest Conference: 2024-11-08
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the District Court's and the Court of Appeals' failure to address James' allegations allow Southland to escape from proving a non-discriminatory reason for its actions and be granted summary judgment, thus denying James a fair trial and reasonable opportunity for rebuttal?

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTION PRESENTED The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson. The ADEA prevents age discrimination and provides equal employment opportunity under the conditions that were not explicitly covered in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Proving age discrimination can be challenging but is possible through direct evidence. Southland "destroyed essential information in this case and failed to present non-discriminatory reasons for its actions, and further failed to allow Plaintiff a reasonable opportunity for rebuttal. Discrimination cases generally turn on circumstantial evidence. Gavalik v. Continental Can ; Co. 812 F.2d 834, 852 (3d.Cit. 1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 979 (1987). A presumption of discrimination arises when a prima facie case is established. McDonnell-Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973), Texas Dept. of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248 (1981). Initially, it is the burden of the Plaintiff to establish that there is some substance to her allegation of discrimination. McDonnell Douglas Corp; Furnco Construction Co. v. Waters, 438 U.S. 567 (1978). : The question presented is: Did the District Court’s and the Court of Appeals’ failure to address James’ allegations (i.e. forgeries and fabricated documents, denial of motions, failure to submit requested copies, failure — to submit video evidence, etc.), allow Southland to escape from proving a non-discriminatory reason for its actions and be granted summary judgment; thus, denying James a fair trial and reasonable opportunity for rebuttal? , ii PARTIES TO THE PETITION: The parties are petitioner Billie Rose James and respondent Southland Casino. In the District Court, Ms. James is pursuing claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1967 and the ADEA, which are at issue in this Court. iti LIST OF PROCEEDINGS BELOW James v. Southland Casino, United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas, Delta Division, Case No. 2:22-CV-00173-JM, Date of Opinion & Order: Filed November 7, 2023 , James v. Southland Casino, U. 8. Court of Appeals for the 8" Circuit, Case No. 23-3587, Date of Opinion & Order: Filed May 17, 2024

Docket Entries

2024-11-12
Petition DENIED.
2024-10-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/8/2024.
2024-08-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 11, 2024)

Attorneys

Billie James
Billie R. James — Petitioner
Billie R. James — Petitioner