Jul 14 2026
5th Cir. 25-40200 Panel Decision

Brenda Brenyah v. Columbia Hospital Corporation of Bay Area

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the district court's grant of summary judgment on Brenda Brenyah's hostile work environment claims while affirming dismissal of her other employment discrimination allegations. The court found sufficient evidence of a genuine dispute regarding the severity of racial harassment and the employer's response.

Jul 13 2026
10th Cir. 2:22-CV-00406-KWR-GJF Panel Decision

Sharpe-Miller v. Walmart

The Tenth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Walmart on most employment discrimination claims but reversed on the hostile-work-environment claim. The court held that the evidence supported a jury finding that the plaintiff was subjected to a hostile work environment based on sexual orientation.

Jul 13 2026
1st Cir. 25-1734 Panel Decision

AMRO FARID v. TRUSTEES OF DARTMOUTH COLLEGE

The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed a district court's grant of summary judgment in an employment discrimination case involving a Dartmouth College professor. The court held that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence that the university's denial of tenure and subsequent research misconduct investigation were motivated by discrimination or retaliation.

Jul 13 2026
1st Cir. 25-1732 Panel Decision

JOHN BUCCIERI v. BREWSTER AMBULANCE SERVICE, INC

The First Circuit affirmed a district court's judgment as a matter of law in an Americans with Disabilities Act case involving a deaf job applicant. The court held that no reasonable jury could find a reasonable accommodation existed that would allow the applicant to perform the essential functions of a Chair Car Driver without imposing an undue hardship on the employer.

Jul 10 2026
11th Cir. 1:22-cv-23519-KMM Published

Akerlund v. Atlas Air, Inc.

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit brought by airline employees challenging pandemic-era vaccination and masking policies. The court held that the district court lacked personal jurisdiction over one defendant and that the plaintiffs failed to state valid claims against the other.