Sunday, April 13, 2008

Judith Klein v. Trustees of Indiana University

I decided to google Title VII and Indiana University in the news and to my amazement I found this case!

Judith Klein was a psychiatrist that worked in the Counseling and Psychiatric Services (CAPS) unit of the Indiana University Health Center. Judith Klein also conducted a private practice three days a week outside of her University employment. In 1976, Klein was announced as an Associate Director of Psychiatry at the Health Center. Later, in 1979, Dr. Foster was made director and Klein's associate director position was eliminated (but Klein still remained on staff as a practicing doctor). Judith Klein filed a complaint with the EEOC claiming she was discriminated against based on gender. Klein allowed the 90 day period to pass without filing suit.

Later, in 1981, Nancy Buckles replaced Dr. Foster as the director of CAPS. Buckles attempted to change Klein's private practice times which were non-accommodating for her. When Klein consistently did not show up to her new hours at CAPS, she was discharged from the university.

Klein again filed a claim with the EEOC, claiming she was wrongfully discharged as a result of retaliation for filing a sexual discrimination suit in the first place. It was noted that Dr. Foster left "lukewarm" evaluations for Klein.

In the end, the Court ruled that Klein failed to fully present material evidence towards her case. A pendent state law claim was also made, however, this the Court ruled that the Trustees of Indiana University were immune to Federal court on state law claims under the Eleventh Amendment.

I invite you to check it out! The case is very interesting and there is much more detail inside!

1 Comments:

Blogger Vic Simianu said...

Great job finding this case! It's very interesting to see these cases arise so close to "home." However, I am wondering why she would leave the 90-day period without filing a claim, first off, but would it matter at all that she had a previous attempt during her second claim? As a second attempt at an EEOC claim, would it merit more credibility that one had a previous issue( although invalid), or would it just aggravate one's situation? Although everything must first go through the prima facie standard, it might be interesting to view the situation on a more hollistic level. Cool case, brad!

2:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home