The CEO-owner of a Colorado law firm must face a former employee’s claim that he’s individually liable as her supervisor for firing her while she was on maternity leave.
Michael W. McDivitt was wrong that Alessandra Morales can’t sue him as an aider and abettor under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, a Denver federal judge said. The judge rejected another US District Court for the District of Colorado jurist’s take in an earlier case on whether supervisors can be liable for aiding and abetting bias, and sided with a magistrate’s recommendation in that case and decisions by Massachusetts and Oregon federal courts.
The pertinent provisions of the CADA draw a distinction between an employer and its employees, Judge William J. Martinez said Wednesday. It’s thus clear that, for aiding-and-abetting purposes under the CADA, an employer and its employees aren’t a single entity and that employees are separate persons who can be sued, Martinez said.
Judge Christine M. Arguello reached a different conclusion in Judson v. Walgreens Co., finding under the “intracorporate conspiracy doctrine” that supervisory employees acting within the scope of their employment aren’t distinct from their employer, Martinez said. But the decisions in Walters v. President & Fellow of Harvard College and Schram v. Albertson’s Inc. were more persuasive, he said.
Walters involved a...
Nigel Farage has been condemned for falsely suggesting five men arrested on suspicion of terror offences near RAF Fairford were Iranian. The Reform UK leader suggested the incident, which saw five...