Brief in Opposition. City of Houston v. Zamora, 136 S.Ct. 2009 (2016) (No. 15-868), 2016 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 1615, 2016 WL 1445907
QUESTIONS PRESENTED (1) Does the liability standard in Staub v. Proctor Hospital, 562 U.S. 411 (2011), apply to retaliation claims under Title VII? (2) Under Staub, where a supervisor for an unlawful purpose has engaged in conduct that was intended to and did in fact cause an adverse employment action, the existence of an independent investigation by other officials does not limit liability unless that investigation reveals a new basis for that adverse action that is “unrelated” to the conduct of the supervisor. The second question presented is: Should the Court overturn the decision in Staub, and hold that an employer can avoid liability on grounds other than those permitted in Staub?
Eric Schnapper; Kim Ogg; Scott Poerschke; Randall L. Kallinen; and Robert McKnight, Jr., Brief in Opposition. City of Houston v. Zamora, 136 S.Ct. 2009 (2016) (No. 15-868), 2016 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 1615, 2016 WL 1445907 (2016), https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/faculty-court-briefs/48