4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
Back pay is mandatory upon a finding of liability under the Age Discrimination, and the district court erred in declining to award it. SCOTUS decisions addressing back pay in Title VII claims don’t govern back pay under the ADEA. This conclusion is not altered by the EEOC’s concededly unreasonable delay in its investigation, which caused Baltimore County to incur substantial additional back pay liability.
Vacated and remanded.
U.S. District Court – Eastern District
Neither the mother of a Henrico student nor her “advocates” have standing to sue the school board for alleged violations of federal disability laws and of the Fourteenth Amendment. The injury-in-fact arising from the student’s withdrawal was suffered by the student himself, not his parent or other adults acting on his behalf. While the IDEA provides parents the right to sue on their own behalf, this right does not extend to the student’s “advocates” in this case.
Under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, the court also abstained from reviewing the plaintiffs’ state-court convictions for trespass after they engaged in a “sit-in” at the student’s school to protest his withdrawal.
Categories: Daily Dockets