Jewish Law Logo Jewish Law - Examining Halacha, Jewish Issues and Secular Law
Jewish Law
Case Summaries
    -- Employment


  1. Siegel v. Truett-Mcconnell College, Inc.

      13 F. Supp. 2d 1335 (N.D. Ga. 1994), Civ. Action No. 2:93-cv-148-WCO. Dated November 3, 1994. Opinion by J. William C. O’Kelley.

    • Christian college, which fired a Jewish instructor under contract to teach, because he was not a Christian, was exempt from suit under Title VII because it was in substantial part supported, controlled and managed by the Georgia Baptist Convention and was therefore entitled, as a matter of law, to discriminate in employment on the basis of religion; this was so, even though plaintiff was to teach off campus in a publicly owned facility; the exemption was not subject to waiver.

  2. Veeter v. Farmland Industries

      901 F. Supp. 1446 (N.D.Iowa 1995)

    • Suit alleged defendant had not reasonably accommodated employee to allow him to live outside his sales territory so that he could live in active Jewish community with synagogue. Following jury verdict for defendant, judge rendered judgement as matter of law for plaintiff.

  3. Glovinsky v. Cohen

      983 F. Supp. 1 (D. D.C. 1997), Civil Action No. 97-1198. Dated October 17, 1997. Opinion by J. Paul L. Friedman.

    • Utterances which engendered offensive feelings in an employee did not sufficiently affect the conditions of employment to implicate Title 7 of the Civil Rights Law of 1964; Jewish employee of National Defense University was instructed to get the best price he could "Jew them down to"; no proof of religious discrimination or hostile work environment.

  4. Tobin v. Pryce

      983 F. Supp. 880 (D. Neb. 1997), No. 4:97CV3027. Dated November 4, 1997. Opinion by: J. Richard G. Kopf.

    • Jewish military officer’s action for religious discrimination brought against superior officers who were disciplined for their conduct held to be nonjusticiable as there was a relevant relationship between plaintiff's military service and his activity at the time his constitutional rights were violated and that litigation of plaintiff's claims in court could affect the military disciplinary process.

  5. Glaser v. Levitt

      1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15343 (N.D. Ill. 1998), No. 98 C 210. Dated September 22, 1998. Opinion by J. Paul E. Plunkett.

    • Orthodox Jew states prima facie claim under Title 7 against employer, the SEC, for disparate treatment and retaliation, but fails to do so on his claim for hostile work environment.

  6. Berman v. Orkin Exterminating Co., Inc.

      160 F.3d 697 (11th Cir. 1998), No. 96-4852. Dated November 13, 1998. Opinion by J. Clark. Concurring in part and dissenting in part, J. Wellford.

    • In Title 7 action, Jewish employee alleged employer retaliated against him after he filed with the EEOC claims of religious discrimination and retaliation; held, under the facts, the trial court should not have granted judgment to the defendant employer as a matter of law.

  7. Balint v. Carson City Nevada

      144 F.3d 1225 (9th Cir. 1998), No. 96-17342. Filed May 26, 1998. Opinion by J. Stephen V. Wilson.

    • "Employer is not required under Title 7 to alter an existing, bona fide seniority-based shift-bidding system to accommodate an employee's religious needs to observe the Sabbath.

  8. Speedone v. Revco DS, Inc.

      166 F.3d 1210, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 23 (4th Cir. 1999), No. 98-1465. Dated January 4, 1999. Per curiam opinion. Note: Case was not officially published. See Rules of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals as to when case may be cited.

    • Actions by Orthodox Jewish pharmacist for religious discrimination and retaliation dismissed; plaintiff, who could not work Friday evenings or on Saturday until Sundown for religious reasons, was refused transfer to a store closer to his home; even if plaintiff demonstrated a prima facie case of discrimination based upon religion, which he did not, the employer advanced legitimate, nondiscriminatory business reasons for its decision not to transfer plaintiff, and plaintiff failed to establish that the justification was pretextual.

  9. In re Claim of McDuffie

      684 N.Y.S.2d 12 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999). Dated January 14, 1999.

    • Employee at Orthodox Jewish nursing home discharged, inter alia, for bringing in non-kosher food into the facility in violation of work rules entitled to unemployment insurance benefits; New York law.

  10. Novitsky v. American Consulting Engineers

      1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1321 (N.D. Ill. 1999), No. 97 C 8854. Dated January 28, 1999. Opinion by J. Charles P. Kocoras.

    • Jewish employee’s claim for religious discrimination and hostile environment dismissed; additional claim that the employer failed to accommodate employee’s religious observance of Yom Kippur dismissed on procedural grounds; the complaint filed with the EEOC was silent with respect to defendant’s alleged failure to accommodate and the failure to accommodate claim was not "like or reasonably related to" the religious discrimination claim.

  11. Thomas v. Runyon

      36 F. Supp. 2d 1284 (D. Kan. 1999), No. 97-1324-WEB. Dated January 5, 1999. Opinion by J. Wesley E. Brown. See also Thomas v. National Association f Letter Carriers, 40 F. Supp. 2d 1244 (D. Kan. 1999).

    • Duty to accommodate postal workers religious objections to working on Saturdays did not require the employer to take steps inconsistent with a collective bargaining agreement; pursuant to the labor agreement between the Postal Service and the union, all residential letter carriers were required to work five Saturdays out of six; each of the alternatives suggested by plaintiff to avoid working on Saturday, including arranging a voluntary and permanent swap@ with some other employee, would have violated this provision of the agreement by permanently excusing plaintiff from Saturday work; the Postal Service was willing to consider an alternative arrangement for Saturday work and asked the union to waive the requirement in plaintiffs case, but the union refused to do so.

  12. Thomas v. National Association of Letter Carriers

      40 F. Supp. 2d 1244 (D. Kan. 1999), No. 98-1314-WEB. Dated January 5, 1999. Opinion by J. Wesley E. Brown. See also Thomas v. Runyon, 36 F. Supp. 2d 1284 (D. Kan. 1999).

    • A federal employee=s only avenue for judicial relief from federal employment discrimination is through Title VII, therefore postal worker=s claims under state law against the postal service based on religious discrimination were dismissed; claims under state law that the union conspired with the employer in failing to accommodate employee=s religious objections to working on Saturday, resulting in his termination, were preempted by federal law which governed the union=s duty of fair representation under the terms of the collective bargaining agreement; and even if plaintiffs state law claims against the union were not preempted, the complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted given the adequate statutory remedy available under Title VII for religious discrimination in employment.

  13. Buckley v. Gomez

      36 F. Supp. 2d 1216 (S.D. Cal. 1997), Civ. No. 95-2372-BTM(JFS). Dated October 8, 1997. Opinion by J. James F. Stiven.

    • State prisoner, an Afro- American Jew, did not state a claim under 42 U.S.C. ' 1983 for being verbally harassed by correction officers as a Jew Boy, however he did state sufficient facts to justify denial of a motion to dismiss claims for racial and religious discrimination and retaliation; correction officers were not entitled to qualified immunity; claims against defendant supervisors on grounds of respondeat superior dismissed.

  14. Heitzman v. Monmouth

      321 N.J. Super. 133, 728 A.2d 297 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1999), No. A-2365-97T1. Dated May 11, 1999. Opinion by J. Skillman.. Concurring in part and dissenting in part, J. Lesemann.

    • Employee claimed he was subject to a hostile work environment owing to a series of anti-Semitic remarks; plaintiff fell within a protected class under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination even though he did not claim to be a practicing Jew; he could maintain a claim of discrimination either on the basis of ancestry or on the basis that defendants perceived him to be Jewish; however the alleged anti-Semitic comments were not sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a discriminatory hostile work environment; discussion of employer's responsibility under law of agency for comments made by supervisor.
  15. State prisoner, an Afro- American Jew, did not state a claim under 42 U.S.C. ' 1983 for being verbally harassed by correction officers as a Jew Boy, however he did state sufficient facts to justify denial of a motion to dismiss claims for racial and religious discrimination and retaliation; correction officers were not entitled to qualified immunity; claims against defendant supervisors on grounds of respondeat superior dismissed.

  16. Dachman v. Shalala

      46 F. Supp. 2d 419 (D. Md. 1999), No. AMD 96-873. Dated April 13, 1999. Opinion by J. Andre M. Davis.

    • Orthodox Jewish employee was routinely allowed religious compensatory time two hours before sunset on Fridays in order to prepare for and observe the Sabbath; she failed to establish that she had a bona fide religious belief that conflicted with the two hour leave restriction when she alleged, inter alia, that the 2 hour limit barely gave her time to bath her children or to bake challah (the traditional Sabbath bread) with her children, or to buy the challah from a particular store.

  17. Balint v. Carson City, Nevada

      180 F.3d 1047 (9th Cir. 1999) (en banc), No. 96-17342. Dated June 14, 1999. Opinion by J. Thomas G. Nelson. Dissenting opinion by J. Andrew J. Kleinfeld.

    • The mere existence of a bona fide seniority system did not relieve the city from the duty to attempt a reasonable accommodation of its employees' religious practice of not working on the Sabbath; if an accommodation can be achieved short of interfering with the city's seniority system and with no more than a de minimis cost, it should be attempted.

  18. Plotkin v. Shalala

      88 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D. D.C. 2000)

    • Evidence did not support Jewish employee's allegation that she was discharged because of her religion or because she complained about office Christmas decorations.

  19. Weiss v. Campagna-Turano Bakeries, Inc.

      76 F. Supp. 2d 936 (N.D. Ill. 1999)

    • Evidence did not support Jewish employee's allegation that he was discharged because of his religion or request to take off for Yom Kippur.

Case Summaries Index