EEOC Litigation in the Circuit Courts

(623 Ratings)

Produced on: January 23, 2017

Course Format On Demand Audio

Taught by

Categories:

Course Description

Time 90 minutes
Difficulty Intermediate

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is the federal agency entrusted with administering most federal civil rights laws, including the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, among others.

The Commission serves multiple important functions including processing individual charges of discrimination, determining the few deemed worthy of a finding of probable cause, and the fewer of those that merit EEOC intervention into the district court as plaintiff in favor of the complainant. The Commission also acts as the Administrative Tribunal for federal-sector employees who grieve violations of these laws in workplace. The EEOC performs multiple other functions, but the one that is the focus of this presentation is its role in shaping interpretation of discrimination law in the Circuit Courts as amicus. In this course, attorneys Gregory Antollino and Stephen Bergstein address recent instances of EEOC intervention in the Circuit Courts and the hot-button issues in employment law that have garnered the attention of the Commission.  

Learning Objectives: 

  1. Discuss an overview of the EEOC, its functions, and the most typical interaction between it, a charging party, and the employers charged with discrimination
  2. Identify cutting edge issues in employment discrimination law that have attracted EEOC attention
  3. Address recent examples of EEOC intervention as amicus in the Circuit Courts, with an emphasis on its 2015 conclusion that discrimination on the basis of sexual-orientation falls within the ambit of Sex Discrimination under the Civil Rights Act and the reasons therefore 

Faculty

Gregory Antollino

Gregory Antollino, Esq.

Gregory Antollino has been practicing civil-rights law since 1993, when he took his first pro bono cases at Weil, Gotshal & Manges, involving Art, Free Speech, and opposition to the Death Penalty. He set up his own small firm in 1995; he practices both civil rights (including employment discrimination and constitutional torts) and legal malpractice. He only represents plaintiffs. Over the course of his career, Gregory has argued over 20 times before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, where he has had affirmed several of his own jury verdicts. He argued once before the New York Court of Appeals, where all seven judges ruled in his favor. His one petition for certiorari to the U.S Supreme Court was noted as “Petition of the Day” on Scotusblog, but cert. was, to his regret, denied.

Greg tries one or two civil cases a year. In 2003, he was invited to attend Gerry Spence’s Trial Lawyer’s College, a three week intensive course for lawyers to get in touch with themselves as people so as better to understand their clients. He has been noted as a “SuperLawyer” since 2011 and in 2015 was rated AV Pre-eminent by Martindale-Hubbell. 

In 2016, Greg attended the intensive Mediation program at the Harvard Law School Program on Negotiation, and hopes to expand his practice to include Alternative Dispute Resolution.

Stephen Bergstein

Bergstein & Ullrich, LLP

Stephen Bergstein received his B.A. from SUNY New Paltz in 1989 and graduated from CUNY Law School in 1993, where he served on the editorial board of the school's law journal. Bergstein is admitted to practice in the courts of the State of New York, the Southern, Eastern and Northern Districts of New York, the Second and Third Circuit Courts of Appeal and the United States Supreme Court. From 2009 through 2016, he was on the Executive Board of the New York chapter of the National Employment Lawyers Association.

Mr. Bergstein has represented scores of plaintiffs in civil rights and employment cases in the State and Federal Courts, helping to set important case precedents involving the First Amendment, employment discrimination, sexual and racial harassment, housing discrimination, search and seizure, false arrest, municipal liability and whistleblower protection.

Mr. Bergstein’s noteworthy cases include:

  • Dancy v. McGinley, 843 F.3d 93 (2d Cir. 2016) (affirming Rule 50 judgment in favor of police misconduct plaintiff).
  • Chauca v. Abraham, 841 F.3d 86 (2d Cir. 2016) (certifying to New York Court of Appeals the issue of what standard governs a plaintiff’s entitlement to punitive damages under the New York City Human Rights Law).
  • Luo v. L & S. Acupuncture, 649 Fed. Appx. 1 (2d Cir. 2016) (affirming award of attorneys’ fees to prevailing plaintiff in case brought under FLSA).
  • Legg v. County of Ulster, 820 F.3d 67 (2d Cir. 2016) (reversing Judgment as a Matter of Law on pregnancy discrimination claim).
  • Estate of D.B. v. Thousand Islands Cent. Sch. Dist., 169 F. Supp. 3d 320 (N.D.N.Y. 2016) (denying motion to dismiss in claim alleging that school district discriminated against student based on gender stereotypes).
  • Kirkweg v. New York City Dep't of Educ., 633 Fed. Appx. 40 (2d Cir. 2016) (reversing Rule 12 dismissal in case alleging retaliation under Title VII).
  • Barboza v. D’Agata, 151 F. Supp. 3d 363 (S.D.N.Y. 2015) (prevailing on summary judgment motion in holding Assistant District Attorney liable on First Amendment/false arrest claim).
  • Marin v. Town of Southeast, 136 F. Supp. 3d 538 (S.D.N.Y. 2015) (prevailing on summary judgment motion in striking down municipal sign ordinance under the First Amendment).
  • Phillips v. County of Orange, 10 Civ. 236, 2016 U.S. Dist. 137662 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 19, 2015) (prevailing on summary judgment claim against County on Fourth Amendment claim alleging that CPS unlawfully seized a minor without probable cause in the course of a child abuse investigation).
  • Muñoz v. Manhattan Club Timeshare Ass'n, 607 Fed. Appx. 85 (2d Cir. 2015) (sustaining disability discrimination verdict and damages award in excess of $600,000).
  • Webb-Webber v. Community Action for Human Services, 23 N.Y.3d 448 (2014) (reversing Appellate Division in holding that Labor Law § 740 does not require plaintiffs to cite statutes, rules or regulations allegedly violated by the employer).
  • Singer v. Ferro, 711 F.3d 334 (2d Cir. 2013) (sustaining summary judgment on plaintiffs’ First Amendment retaliation claims arising from workplace speech).
  • Zeno v. Pine Plains Cent. Sch. Dist., 702 F.3d 655 (2d Cir. 2012) (sustaining $1 million plaintiff’s verdict on student-on-student racial harassment claim brought under Title IX).
  • Back v. Hastings on Hudson School District, 365 F.3d 107 (2d Cir. 2004) (recognizing caregiver discrimination as a violation of Title VII);
  • Catletti v. Rampe, 334 F.3d 225 (2d Cir. 2003) (First Amendment retaliation);
  • Whidbee v. Garzarelli Food Services, 223 F.3d 62 (2d Cir. 2000) (racial harassment);

Mr. Bergstein is a member of the American Bar Association, the New York State Bar Association and the Orange County Bar Association. Mr. Bergstein frequently lectures on civil rights issues, providing attorneys and law students with guidance on employment discrimination and civil rights.


Reviews

MH
Marjorie H.

Interesting topic.

BC
Bonnie C.

Great information and lively presentation— time flew by!

LR
Lisette R.

I enjoyed the course. It gave me insight.

AE
Amy E.

Interesting speakers. Great anecdotes used to explain the issues

AW
Andre W.

good

RF
raymond f.

good course

CM
Cheryl M.

Very current topic

HB
Harriet B.

Excellent presentation by two learned attorneys. The information was on point, relevant and well researched. Kudos!

NM
Nicole M.

EXCELLENT & INFORMATIVE COURSE. BEST SO FAR. PRESENTERS CLEARLY KNOWLEDGEABLE IN SUBJECT MATTER & PROGRESSION OF COURSE HELD MY INTEREST THROUGHOUT.

MW
Marcia W.

Slightly less effective delivery from one attorney, but interesting nonetheless.

BW
Brenda W.

Interesting dynamics between the two presenters.

ND
nancy d.

Great

JS
Jeffrey S.

Good course.

DM
David B. M.

The two attorney's worked together well to present this information

MM
Marian M.

This was an excellent presentation. Kudos to these two attorneys for a fine job

PF
Patricia F.

Good session

RR
Ron R.

Great presentation by both attorneys. Very knowledgable and articulate about the issues.

JB
Julie A. B.

A worthwhile, meaningful, well-guided tour of the topic peppered with case highlights and analysis. Appreciated the supplemental Wis. L. Rev. article, "Homosexuality and the Social Meaning of Gender."

Load More

$89

$ 89 Constitutional Law, Litigation, Civil Rights, and Public Interest Law In Stock

Accreditation

Get Unlimited Access to Lawline Courses

Unlimited CLE Subscription gives you access to take almost any course from our catalog and earn as much CLE credit as you need.