Alert
Close

Introducing AARP RealPad: The Wi-Fi Tablet That Makes It Easy to Share, Learn, Connect and Play. Learn more

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

 

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: Peterson v. Seagate US LLC

Court: U.S. Dist. Ct. Minn.

Read Summary

Case Result: Age discrimination case of 63 former employees was resolved successfully by settlement.

Case Name: Ponce v. Billington

Court: U.S. Ct. App. D.C. Cir.   Docket: 11-5117

Read Summary and AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result:  Although affirming the jury verdict against the plaintiff on Title VII race, sex, and national origin discrimination claims, the appeals court declared that "nothing in Title VII required a plaintiff to show that illegal discrimination was the sole cause of an adverse employment action.

Case Name: Powell v. Dallas Morning News

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 5th Cir.   Docket: 11-10697

Read Summary and AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: Defendants' alleged reliance on subjective criteria for selecting employees for a reduction in force did not have a disparate impact on older workers.

Case Name: Reid v. Google, Inc.

Court: Cal. Supreme Ct.    Docket: S158965

Read Summary and AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: Court concluded that evidence of "stray remarks" should be considered with all the evidence in the record because its categorical exclusion might lead to unfair results, declining to follow federal law that requires courts to view in isolation statements by coworkers and nondecisionmakers or comment unrelated to the employment decision being challenged and categorically exclude such evidence.

Case Name: Rhodes v. R + L Carriers, Inc.

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 6th Cir.    Docket: 11-3054

Read Summary and AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: The complaint that alleged numerous violations of federal and state discrimination law by the defendant was more than adequate to survive a motion to dismiss.

Case Name: Romero v. Allstate Ins. Corp. (2005)

Court: U.S. Dist. Ct. Pa.

Read Summary

Case Issue: Did employer unlawfully retaliate against the plaintiffs (former agents) by filing counterclaims against them alleging (falsely) that the plaintiffs violated the terms of the release they were required to sign when they were terminated?

Case Name: Romero v. Allstate Ins. Co. (2001)

Court: U.S. Dist. Ct. Pa.

Read Summary

Case Issue: Did employer violate ERISA and/or the ADEA when it involuntarily terminated employee-agents, 90% of whom were older workers, in order to convert those willing to sign a release to independent contractor status?

Case Name: Sander v. Gray Television Group

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 6th Cir.   Docket: 10-6120

Read Summary AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: Court affirms age discimination (ADEA) case of summary judgment to the employer despite dispute whether employee was discharged or voluntarily resigned, failing to draw inferences in favor of opposing party.

Case Name: Squyres v. The Heico Companies

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 5th Cir.   Docket: 13-11358

Read Summary and AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Issue: Did the court violate its duty at summary judgment by weighing the evidence, making credibility determinations, and failing to draw inferences in favor of the plaintiff, the non-moving party?

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.