TITLE

REQUIEM FOR A HEAVYWEIGHT: COSTA AS COUNTERMONUMENT TO MCDONNELL DOUGLAS--A COUNTERMEMORY REPLY TO INSTRUMENTALISM

AUTHOR(S)
Van Detta, Jeffrey A.
PUB. DATE
May 2004
SOURCE
Albany Law Review;2004, Vol. 67 Issue 4, p965
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
Presents a monumentalist-countermonumentalist analysis of the U.S. Supreme Court case of Desert Palace Inc. versus Costa. Association of the Costa case with the Section 703 (M) of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 on employment practices in the U.S.; Examination of the process of monumentalism as represented by the judicial interpretation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; Amendment to Section 703 (m) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
ACCESSION #
14593438

 

Related Articles

  • DESERT PALACE, INC., dba CAESARS PALACE HOTEL & CASINO v. COSTA: certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit.  // Supreme Court Cases: The Twenty-first Century (2000 - Present);2009, p1 

    The article presents information on U.S. Supreme Court case Desert Palace Inc. dba Caesars Palace Hotel & Casino v. Costa, case number 02-679, argued on April 21, 2003 and decided on June 9, 2003. The case is about an alleged employment discrimination on the basis of sex. The Court of Appeals...

  • THE NEW DISCRIMINATION LAW: PRICE WATERHOUSE IS DEAD, WHITHER McDONNELL DOUGLAS? Zimmer, Michael J. // Emory Law Journal;Fall2004, Vol. 53 Issue 4, p1887 

    The article provides information on the new discrimination law in the U.S. The Desert Palace Inc. v. Costa has been termed as the most surprising decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in 2002. While it was not unexpected that the Court might grant certiorari on an en banc decision of the Ninth...

  • Supreme Court Clarifies Burden in Mixed Motive Cases. Littrell, Amy W. // Venulex Legal Summaries;2003 Q2, p1 

    The article focuses on the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in the Desert Palace Inc. versus Costa case in which it held that a plaintiff in a mixed motive discrimination case does not have to present direct evidence of discrimination to get to a jury. It presents information on the provisions...

  • PROOF OF DISPARATE TREATMENT UNDER FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS LAWS. Drachsler, David A. // Labor Law Journal;Winter2005, Vol. 56 Issue 4, p229 

    The article discusses disparate treatment cases heard by the U.S. Supreme court and the plaintiff's burden of proof. Evidence of discrimination as a motivating factor in an employment action is proof of a civil rights violation. The tripartite burden analysis in the McDonnell Douglas Corp.v....

  • Desert Palace v. Costa, 123 S. Ct. 2148 (June 9, 2003).  // FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin;Apr2004, Vol. 73 Issue 4, p32 

    Deals with the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court on a lawsuit filed by a former female warehouse employee against her former employer for gender discrimination and sexual harassment under Title VII 1964 Civil Rights Act, in connection with the case Desert Palace versus Costa. Factors that led...

  • The Freilich Report: A Review of 2002-03 U.S. Supreme Court Decisions During an Era of Domestic Insecurity. Freilich, Robert H.; Abeln, Rebecca M.; Willauer, Brigette L. // Urban Lawyer;Fall2003, Vol. 35 Issue 4, p565 

    Presents a review of U.S. Supreme Court Decisions from 2002 to 2003. Decision on affirmative action in the Grutter v. Bollinger case; Ruling in the privacy case Lawrence v. Texas; Conclusion on the workers' rights case Desert Palace v. Costa.

  • Direct Discrimination Evidence Not Needed In Mixed-Motive Case. Clark, Margaret M. // HR Magazine;Jul2003, Vol. 48 Issue 7, p25 

    Examines a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court on the case Desert Palace Inc. versus Costa which deals with employment discrimination. Advantage of plaintiffs who positioned a claim as a mixed motive case; Difficulty of obtaining a direct evidence; Facts disputed in the case.

  • Supreme Court Rules for Employees in Mixed-Motive Cases. Yerkes, Kenneth J. // Venulex Legal Summaries;2003 Q2, p1 

    The article focuses on the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in the Desert Palace Inc. versus Costa case that plaintiffs are not required to present direct evidence of discrimination to obtain a mixed-motive instruction. The plaintiff claimed that she was sexually harassed and that she was...

  • U.S. Supreme Court Makes Job Bias Easier to Prove. Holbrook, Peter D.; Scheithauer, Christopher // Venulex Legal Summaries;2003 Q2, p1 

    The article focuses on the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in the case Desert Place Inc. doing business as Caesars Palace Hotel & Casino versus Costa. The court ruled that an employee can still take their discrimination case to the jury showing circumstantial evidence that illegal bias was a...

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of VIRGINIA BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY AND SYSTEM

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics