Retaliation

IDEM whistleblower makes argument to Indiana Supreme Court

May 18, 2017
Marilyn Odendahl
A former employee of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management appeared in the Indiana Supreme Court courtroom Thursday arguing her right to bring a complaint against the state under the whistleblower provision of the Indiana False Claims Act.
More

Company must face fired worker’s religion discrimination claim

May 11, 2017
Dave StaffordMore

Former COO of health firm claims discrimination in firing

January 20, 2017
Indianapolis Business Journal, John Russell
A former executive at an Indianapolis-based chain of health clinics says he was fired because of his age, race and national origin, and in retaliation because he stood up for one of his female managers.
More

Ex-Supreme Court employee suing high court for discrimination, retaliation

December 28, 2016
Olivia Covington
A former Indiana Supreme Court employee is suing the state’s highest court for alleged ongoing disability discrimination and retaliatory actions.
More

Judge denies summary judgment on claim of sex discrimination by state police

November 28, 2016
Olivia Covington
A federal judge has denied summary judgment in favor of Indiana State Police in a sex discrimination case, finding that a former officer’s evidence in the case creates a factual dispute about her claim that the department decline to hire her for a civilian position after her retirement because she is a woman.
More

Auditor says Eskenazi Health fired her for identifying improper billing

November 11, 2016
Indianapolis Business Journal, John Russell
A compliance auditor at Eskenazi Health claims she was fired after alerting her supervisor that the hospital was improperly billing the federal government and Indiana for potentially hundreds of patients whose bills were already being paid by research grants.
More

ISP officer loses whistleblower appeal

November 2, 2016
Dave Stafford
State workers alleging retaliation for whistleblower activities must first exhaust all administrative remedies before suing, the Indiana Court of Appeals held Wednesday, affirming a trial court ruling against a 27-year Indiana State Police officer.
More

Lawsuit: Ex-IU med school official says he was sexually harassed

May 6, 2016
Indianapolis Business Journal, John Russell
A former administrator at the Indiana University School of Medicine says he was pressured to resign after complaining about a female administrator he claims sexually harassed him.
More

IPFW custodian loses appeal of discrimination, retaliation claims

October 26, 2015
Jennifer Nelson
An Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne custodian who was fired for his role in a physical confrontation with another custodian could not convince the Indiana Court of Appeals that his discrimination and retaliation claims should proceed to trial.
More

Ex-Columbus teacher’s FMLA violation claims reinstated

August 25, 2015
Dave Stafford
A Columbus teacher who claimed his contract wasn’t renewed after he missed 23 days of school should have his day in court on his claims that the school system interfered with his rights under the Family Medical Leave Act and retaliated against him.
More

Inmate not disadvantaged by appearing at trial by video

June 23, 2015
Jennifer Nelson
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Monday that a New Jersey inmate who filed a retaliation lawsuit against officials at an Indiana prison while he was housed there was not disadvantaged when the judge denied his request to be transported to Indiana for the trial. The judge instead ordered he appear by video conferencing.
More

Lack of post-verdict motion dooms fired employee’s appeal

February 26, 2015
Jennifer Nelson
The 7th Circuit court of Appeals quickly affirmed a jury verdict against a former employee in the Lake County Auditor’s Office who claimed she was unlawfully terminated for political reasons. The ex-employee failed to file any post-verdict motions, a necessary first step for the appeals court to review the case.
More

Civil Rights Commission exceeded authority in upholding complaint

January 6, 2015
Marilyn Odendahl
Finding the Indiana Civil Rights Commission overstepped its authority, the Indiana Supreme Court has vacated the organization’s final order regarding an “intra-group squabble” over a dinner menu.
More

Fired DOC counselor’s sex-discrimination claim revived by 7th Circuit

July 22, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated a former Department of Correction substance abuse counselor’s lawsuit alleging sex-discrimination and hostile work environment, finding she was treated differently as compared to the employee she had an affair with while working at a maximum-security prison.
More

Correctional officer fails to support claims of discrimination against employer

February 24, 2014
Marilyn Odendahl
A former officer in the Indiana Department of Correction had her claims of employment discrimination and retaliation rejected by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals on the grounds she failed to provide supporting evidence.
More

Divided court reverses teen’s intimidation adjudication

January 30, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
Split over whether a teen’s threats toward his grandfather were intended to place the man in fear of retaliation for a prior lawful act, two Indiana Court of Appeals judges reversed a teen’s delinquency adjudication for committing intimidation.
More

Justices take homeschooling-group expulsion case

October 28, 2013
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court has agreed to hear two cases, including one involving a homeschooling group that presented an issue of first impression regarding education under civil rights law.
More

Police officer’s suit alleging retaliation for political comment survives

July 9, 2013
Jennifer Nelson
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed summary judgment in favor of two Portage police officers and the city on a detective’s claim that he was transferred in retaliation for comments he made to a local newspaper following the mayoral primary election in 2007.
More

Wal-Mart did not discriminate against pregnant employee, 7th Circuit rules

June 12, 2012
Jenny Montgomery
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals held that a woman failed to prove her claims of discrimination, retaliation and other complaints against her former employer.
More

7th Circuit affirms court in retaliation claim

June 8, 2012
Jenny Montgomery
A man who claimed he was wrongfully terminated in retaliation for claiming racial discrimination at his workplace was fired for just cause, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled.
More

Rolls-Royce must answer federal whistleblower suit on military engines

June 5, 2012
Dave Stafford
Rolls-Royce must answer whistleblowers’ allegations that the company violated manufacturing standards, concealed defects in military aircraft engines, and retaliated against workers who raised concerns, a federal judge ruled Monday.
More

Woman can't prove pregnancy discrimination

January 12, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for a stone company after finding a woman couldn't prove the company knew she was pregnant when it decided to relocate her to another office.
More

Man not fired for being 'whistle-blower'

November 19, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment in favor of a plaintiff's former company, finding no evidence the company fired him in retaliation for being a whistle-blower.
More
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The appellate court just said doctors can be sued for reporting child abuse. The most dangerous form of child abuse with the highest mortality rate of any form of child abuse (between 6% and 9% according to the below listed studies). Now doctors will be far less likely to report this form of dangerous child abuse in Indiana. If you want to know what this is, google the names Lacey Spears, Julie Conley (and look at what happened when uninformed judges returned that child against medical advice), Hope Ybarra, and Dixie Blanchard. Here is some really good reporting on what this allegation was: http://media.star-telegram.com/Munchausenmoms/ Here are the two research papers: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0145213487900810 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213403000309 25% of sibling are dead in that second study. 25%!!! Unbelievable ruling. Chilling. Wrong.

  2. MELISA EVA VALUE INVESTMENT Greetings to you from Melisa Eva Value Investment. We offer Business and Personal loans, it is quick and easy and hence can be availed without any hassle. We do not ask for any collateral or guarantors while approving these loans and hence these loans require minimum documentation. We offer great and competitive interest rates of 2% which do not weigh you down too much. These loans have a comfortable pay-back period. Apply today by contacting us on E-mail: melisaeva9@gmail.com WE DO NOT ASK FOR AN UPFRONT FEE. BEWARE OF SCAMMERS AND ONLINE FRAUD.

  3. Mr. Levin says that the BMV engaged in misconduct--that the BMV (or, rather, someone in the BMV) knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged fees but did nothing to correct the situation. Such misconduct, whether engaged in by one individual or by a group, is called theft (defined as knowingly or intentionally exerting unauthorized control over the property of another person with the intent to deprive the other person of the property's value or use). Theft is a crime in Indiana (as it still is in most of the civilized world). One wonders, then, why there have been no criminal prosecutions of BMV officials for this theft? Government misconduct doesn't occur in a vacuum. An individual who works for or oversees a government agency is responsible for the misconduct. In this instance, somebody (or somebodies) with the BMV, at some time, knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged. What's more, this person (or these people), even after having the error of their ways pointed out to them, did nothing to fix the problem. Instead, the overcharges continued. Thus, the taxpayers of Indiana are also on the hook for the millions of dollars in attorneys fees (for both sides; the BMV didn't see fit to avail itself of the services of a lawyer employed by the state government) that had to be spent in order to finally convince the BMV that stealing money from Indiana motorists was a bad thing. Given that the BMV official(s) responsible for this crime continued their misconduct, covered it up, and never did anything until the agency reached an agreeable settlement, it seems the statute of limitations for prosecuting these folks has not yet run. I hope our Attorney General is paying attention to this fiasco and is seriously considering prosecution. Indiana, the state that works . . . for thieves.

  4. I'm glad that attorney Carl Hayes, who represented the BMV in this case, is able to say that his client "is pleased to have resolved the issue". Everyone makes mistakes, even bureaucratic behemoths like Indiana's BMV. So to some extent we need to be forgiving of such mistakes. But when those mistakes are going to cost Indiana taxpayers millions of dollars to rectify (because neither plaintiff's counsel nor Mr. Hayes gave freely of their services, and the BMV, being a state-funded agency, relies on taxpayer dollars to pay these attorneys their fees), the agency doesn't have a right to feel "pleased to have resolved the issue". One is left wondering why the BMV feels so pleased with this resolution? The magnitude of the agency's overcharges might suggest to some that, perhaps, these errors were more than mere oversight. Could this be why the agency is so "pleased" with this resolution? Will Indiana motorists ever be assured that the culture of incompetence (if not worse) that the BMV seems to have fostered is no longer the status quo? Or will even more "overcharges" and lawsuits result? It's fairly obvious who is really "pleased to have resolved the issue", and it's not Indiana's taxpayers who are on the hook for the legal fees generated in these cases.

  5. From the article's fourth paragraph: "Her work underscores the blurry lines in Russia between the government and businesses . . ." Obviously, the author of this piece doesn't pay much attention to the "blurry lines" between government and businesses that exist in the United States. And I'm not talking only about Trump's alleged conflicts of interest. When lobbyists for major industries (pharmaceutical, petroleum, insurance, etc) have greater access to this country's elected representatives than do everyday individuals (i.e., voters), then I would say that the lines between government and business in the United States are just as blurry, if not more so, than in Russia.

ADVERTISEMENT