In an opinion yesterday, Judge Oetken denied the defendants’ pre-discovery summary judgment motion in a sex discrimination suit against the law firm Chadbourne & Parke and certain partners. The defendants argued that the named plaintiffs, as firm partners, did not qualify as “employees” of the firm for purposes of the relevant discrimination statutes because of their titles and because of the terms of the partnership agreement.

Judge Oetken concluded, however, that the plaintiffs were entitled to discovery to prove whether the various factors distinguishing employees and owners were present in the case, and focused in particular on whether the firm was really run by a centralized Management Committee, as opposed to the partners generally:
Continue Reading Judge Oetken:  Law Firm Partners Can Be “Employees” for Purposes of Sex Discrimination Suit, Based on Control by Management Committee

In an opinion yesterday, Judge Koeltl dismissed discrimination and retaliation claims from a chauffeur for the Swedish foreign ministry, finding that the case did not fall within the “commercial” exception to sovereign immunity:

In his capacity as a chauffeur, the plaintiff was responsible for transporting the Swedish Ambassador and the Ambassador’s family, Swedish diplomats and

The producers of American Idol last week moved to dismiss a discrimination suit alleging that African-American contestants with prior arrests or convictions were shamed and disqualified while similarly-situated white contestants were promoted as “second chance” stories. (See our prior post here.) The motion begins by highlighting the success of African-American contestants generally:
Continue Reading American Idol Moves to Dismiss Discrimination Suit on First Amendment Grounds