"Disparate Impact" Theory Available In Age Discrimination Cases
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 04.07.05
Resolving a split in the circuit courts, a divided Supreme Court in Smith v. City of Jackson, (Mar. 30, 2005) held that the "disparate impact" theory of liability, which does not require a showing of discriminatory intent, applies to claims asserted under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). However, the Court noted that "the scope of disparate-impact liability under ADEA is narrower" than under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, due to statutory language in ADEA that permits employers to take "otherwise prohibited" employment action where the "differentiation is based on reasonable factors other than age," such as seniority or rank.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 09.18.25
On September 9, 2025, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Food and Drug Administration (HHS) issued a news release announcing an “aggressive[]” “crackdown” on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. This release came on the heels of a Presidential Memorandum President Trump issued the same day directing HHS to “ensure transparency and accuracy in direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertisements,” and the FDA to “take action to enforce legal requirements that advertisements for prescription drugs be truthful and not misleading.”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 09.17.25
Client Alert | 4 min read | 09.17.25
Client Alert | 5 min read | 09.16.25
Bucking the Odds: Why Technology Companies Should Embrace Software Patents Today
