DONATE

Be part of the solution.

Help AARP Foundation win back opportunity for struggling Americans 50 and over.

Charity Rating

AARP Foundation earns high rating for accountability from a leading charity evaluator. Read

Connect with the
Foundation

Email:

foundation@aarp.org


AARP Foundation Litigation:

202-434-2060


Toll-free Nationwide:

888-OUR-AARP

(888-687-2277)

 

Toll-free TTY:

877-434-7598

 

AARP Foundation Tax ID

52-0794300

AARP Foundation Legal Advocacy

Docket: Employment Discrimination

    

Case Name: Hale v. ABF Freight Systems

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 6th Cir.     Docket: 11-6440

Read Summary AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: Summary judgment for defendant was reversed and case remanded for trial based on supervisor's ageist statements which were direct evidence of age discrimination.

Case Name Hall v. Rite Aid (See also under Other docket, Kilby v. CVS Pharmacy;Henderson v. JPMorgan Chase Bank)

Court: Cal. Ct. App.     Docket: D062909

Read Summary and AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Issue: Does state law mandate that working employees be provided with seats when their work reasonable permits use of seats?

Case Name: Harpham v. City of Dublin, Ohio

Court: U.S. Dist. Ct. SD Ohio

Read Summary  

Case Result: City agreed to reimburse the plaintiff the benefits he had been denied because of his age and to amend its health care plan so that older workers are no longer denied benefits.

Case Name: Hester v. Indiana State Dep't of Health

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 7th Cir    Docket: 12-3207

Read Summary AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: The court affirmed the ruling in favor of defendant on plaintiff's race, gender and age discrimination claims without question of sovereign immunity.

Case Name: Hilde v. City of Eveleth

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 8th Cir.    Docket: S14-1016

ReadAARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Issue: Do hiring decisions based on eligibility for retirement violate ADEA?

Case Name: Iskanian v. CLS Transportation

Court: Cal. Supreme Court    Docket: S204032

Read Summary and AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: Arbitration agreement requiring an employee, as a condition of employment, to give up the right to bring representative state statutory private attorney actions in any forum is contrary to public policy.

Case Name: Jacob v. Duane Reade

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 2d Cir.     Docket: 13-3873-cv

Read Summary and Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Issue: Was court correct in certifying a class action for purposes of deciding issues of liability only, and not issues of damages.

Case Name: Knotts v. Grafton City Hospital

Court: Supreme Ct. of App. WV   Docket: 14-0752

Read Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Issue: Can employee prove age discrimination by showing that employer gave a false reason for firing, and that she was replaced by employees who are between twelve and twenty-four years younger?

Case Name: Lee v. City of Columbus

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 6th Cir.    Docket: 09-3899

Read Summary and AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: Policy that police employees provide their immediate supervisor, upon returning from more than three days of sick leave, a doctor's note identifying the condition that required them to be out of work does not violate the Rehabilitation Act because such a policy, even if it "may tend to " reveal information about employee disabilities, does not demonstrate discrimination "solely on the basis of disability."

Case Name: Mach Mining v. EEOC

Court: U.S. Supreme Court    Docket: 13-1019

Read Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Issue: May a court review the sufficiency of the EEOS's pre-suit efforts?

Case Name: Madigan v. Levin

Court: U.S. Supreme Court    Docket: 12-872

Read Attorney Kohrman's Blog Post AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: Court dismissed appeal as "improvidently granted" preserving lower court ruling that age discriminaiton victims may bring claims under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment despite ADEA's comprehensive remedial scheme.

Case Name: McDaniel v. Momentive Inc.

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 5th Cir.    Docket: 14-20410, 14-20462

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: Parties entered into confidential settlement and dismissed appeal before oral argument.

Case Name: Meacham v. Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory

Court: U.S. Supreme Court    Docket: 09-1449

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: Court denied cert and as a result there will be a new trial in the case 14 years after the plaintiffs were terminated in a reduction-in-force.

Case Name: Merritt v. Wellpoint, Inc.

Court: U.S. Dist. Ct. ED Va.    Docket: 08-272

Read Summary and Settlement Agreement (PDF)

Case Result: In settlement of all claims, employer paid $2.6 million to the "collective" class consisting of 153 former Wellpoint employees.

Case Name: Mission Consol. Indep. School Dist. v. Garcia

Court: Supreme Ct. of Texas    Docket:  10-0802

Read Summary and AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result:  Age discrimination employment claim under state law may not proceed based on assertion of age bias not substantiated by evidence rebutting a defendant's proof that plaintiff was replaced by an older employee.

Case Name: Muhammad v. Stagecoach Group

Court: NJ Superior Court, Union County    Docket: UNN-L-003819-09

Read Summary

Case Result: Confidential settlement of all parties included agreement to revised (vastly improved) diabetes employment policy and issuance of joint press release announcing the policy.

Case Name: Palmquist v. Shinseki

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 1st Cir.    Docket: 11-2110

Read Summary AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: In workplace disability retaliation case under the Rehabilitation Act, court rejected "mixed motive" claim. 

Topic Alerts

You can get weekly email alerts on the topics below. Just click “Follow.”

Manage Alerts

Processing

Please wait...

progress bar, please wait

Search Legal Advocacy

Find
Legal Cases

Find the most recent cases in which AFL has advocated in courts nationwide for the rights of older persons, and filed AARP’s amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) briefs that help courts decide precedent-setting cases.

Strengthening Law and Policy through
Legal Advocacy

Our legal advocacy initiatives  - conducted by AARP Foundation Litigation (AFL) - reflect more than 15 years of work in federal and state courts across the country. Through our efforts, we support the Foundation’s four priority areas: Hunger, Income, Housing and Isolation, and ensure that those 50 and older have a voice in the laws and policies that affect their daily lives.