Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 11-22-2023

Case Style:

Christie Poitra v. Michigan States University

Case Number: 1:22-cv-00047

Judge: Jane M. Beckering

Court: United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan (Kent County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: United States Attorney’s Office in Grand Rapids

Defendant's Attorney:



Click Here For The Best Grand Rapids Civil Rights Lawyer Directory




Description: Grand Rapids, Michigan civil rights lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendant on a 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment) theory.

"Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq.), also known as the Equal Employment Opportunity Act (EEO Act), is a federal law in the United States that prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. The law was enacted in 1964 during the Civil Rights Movement after passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It was later amended to include prohibitions against discrimination based on sex (1972) and disability (1990), and to prohibit employment discrimination against older workers (1967).

Key Provisions of Title VII

Title VII prohibits employers, labor unions, employment agencies, and the federal government from discriminating against employees on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. The law applies to all employers with 15 or more employees, and to labor unions and employment agencies with 15 or more members.

Prohibited Practices

Title VII prohibits a wide range of employment discrimination practices, including:

Refusal to hire: Employers cannot refuse to hire an applicant because of their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
Discrimination in terms and conditions of employment: Employers cannot discriminate against an employee in hiring, firing, promotion, compensation, or other terms and conditions of employment because of their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
Harassment: Employers cannot create or tolerate a hostile work environment for employees based on their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
Retaliation: Employers cannot retaliate against employees for filing a charge of discrimination or for participating in an investigation of discrimination.

Enforcement of Title VII

Title VII is enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The EEOC investigates charges of discrimination and, if it finds that discrimination has occurred, it may take action to enforce the law, including filing a lawsuit in federal court.

Remedies for Discrimination Under Title VII

If an individual is successful in proving a claim for discrimination under Title VII, they may be entitled to a number of remedies, including:

Back pay: Back pay is the wages that an individual would have earned if they had not been discriminated against.
Front pay: Front pay is the wages that an individual is expected to earn in the future if they are unable to find a job due to discrimination.
Reinstatement: Reinstatement is the right of an individual to be reinstated to their job after being discriminated against.
Injunctive relief: Injunctive relief is a court order that prohibits the defendant from continuing to discriminate against the individual.
Compensatory damages: Compensatory damages are damages that are intended to compensate the individual for the harm that they have suffered as a result of the discrimination.
Punitive damages: Punitive damages are damages that are intended to punish the defendant for their reckless or willful conduct.

Conclusion

Title VII is a vital law that protects the rights of millions of American workers. It has helped to create a more fair and equitable workplace for all."

Google Bard

Outcome: 11/22/2023 54 STIPULATION of dismissal by Plaintiff Poitra and by defendants Michigan State University, Michigan State University Board of Trustees (Higginson, Ashley) (Entered: 11/22/2023)
11/22/2023 55 ORDER OF DISMISSAL granting proposed stipulated order 54 ; this action is dismissed with prejudice, and without any costs, attorney fees, and/or interest; closing the case; signed by District Judge Jane M. Beckering (rmw) (Entered: 11/22/2023)

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



Find a Lawyer

Subject:
City:
State:
 

Find a Case

Subject:
County:
State: