Recently, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, in Mathis v. Christian Heating and Air Conditioning, 13-3747 (March 12, 2015), examined the effect of factual findings in unemployment compensation proceedings in Pennsylvania on discrimination claims filed in federal court. The conclusion? The discrimination case is a “do-over,” and nothing determined by the tribunal (including the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review and the Commonwealth Court) will collaterally estop either party, presumably, from taking a contrary position in the subsequent wrongful-termination suit.
The facts are these: Paul Mathis was employed at Christian Heating and Air Conditioning for nearly two years. During that time, Mathis had placed black tape over part of his identification badge. According to the opinion, the objectionable part of the card to him professed the company’s mission statement to, inter alia, run the business in a way that was “pleasing to the lord [sic] …” Mathis’ supervisor and the owner of the business required him to remove the tape from the back of his badge. Mathis refused to do so, and contended that he was terminated as a result.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
