Discrimination/Retaliation
*Christmon v. B&B Airparts, Inc. (10th Cir., May 24, 2018) (affirming summary judgment in favor of B&B on Christmon's religious discrimination claim: B&B reasonably accommodated Christmon's beliefs)
Labor Unions
Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis (U.S., May 21, 2018) (The Federal Arbitration Act mandates that arbitration agreements providing for individual proceedings be enforced as written)
*Christmon v. B&B Airparts, Inc. (10th Cir., May 24, 2018) (affirming summary judgment in favor of B&B on Christmon's religious discrimination claim: B&B reasonably accommodated Christmon's beliefs)
Labor Unions
Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis (U.S., May 21, 2018) (The Federal Arbitration Act mandates that arbitration agreements providing for individual proceedings be enforced as written)
Public Employee/Employers
Howick v. Salt Lake City Corporation (Utah, May 25, 2018) (affirming summary judgment that Howick was equitably estopped from claiming she was a merit employee when she was terminated because she failed to challenge the district court's equitable estoppel ruling---even though she may very well be correct: Ockey precedent may not extend to government employee contracts)
Palmer v. St. George City Council (Utah Ct. App., May 24, 2018) (setting aside Appeal Board's decision regarding Palmer's discipline and remanding for the city to produce evidence of comparable discipline and to hold a new disciplinary hearing)
Workers Compensation/Occupational Safety and Disease
*Green v. Berryhill (10th Cir., May 24, 2018) (reversing district court order affirming Commissioner's denial of disability benefits: the ALJ failed to conduct a proper analysis of the evidence)
*Racette v. Berryhill (10th Cir., May 22, 2018) (reversing denial of disability benefits and supplemental income: the ALJ failed to comply with relevant legal standards in assessing Racette's impairments)
*Cases marked with an asterisk are 10th Circuit cases the court declared not to be binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. They may be cited, however, for persuasive value under Fed.R.App.P. 32.1 and 10th Cir.R. 32.1.