Discrimination/Retaliation
*Peavy v. Labor Source, LLC (10th Cir., June 26, 2018) (affirming denial of Peavy's "collateral attack" on dismissal of his discrimination suit from 2015: he presented no fact or law permitting reversal)
Labor Unions
Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31 (U.S., June 27, 2018) (States and public-sector unions may not extract agency fees from nonconsenting employees: it is a violation of the First Amendment (overturning Abood v. Detroit Bd.of Ed., 431 U. S. 209, 235–236))
Wages
*Shields v. U.S. Postal Service (10th Cir., June 28, 2018) (reversing dismissal of complaint for failure to state a claim: EPA statute of limitations is an affirmative defense, and therefore need not be anticipated in the plaintiff’s complaint)
*Peavy v. Labor Source, LLC (10th Cir., June 26, 2018) (affirming denial of Peavy's "collateral attack" on dismissal of his discrimination suit from 2015: he presented no fact or law permitting reversal)
Labor Unions
Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31 (U.S., June 27, 2018) (States and public-sector unions may not extract agency fees from nonconsenting employees: it is a violation of the First Amendment (overturning Abood v. Detroit Bd.of Ed., 431 U. S. 209, 235–236))
Wages
*Shields v. U.S. Postal Service (10th Cir., June 28, 2018) (reversing dismissal of complaint for failure to state a claim: EPA statute of limitations is an affirmative defense, and therefore need not be anticipated in the plaintiff’s complaint)
Workers Compensation/Occupational Safety and Disease
*Jake's Fireworks, Inc., v. Acosta (10th Cir., June 28, 2018) (affirming OSHA citation for violation of health and safety standards after fire broke out, injuring one employee
and killing another)
*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.