[IPAC-List] Supreme's extend Cat's Paw theory to most discrimination claims

Jeff Feuquay jfeuquay at ipaconline.org
Wed Apr 6 12:01:37 EDT 2011

I think it's important for us to be aware of a recent case and I haven't
noticed anything on the list . . . sorry, if I've just been inattentive and
missed it.

On March 1, 2011 the U.S. Supreme Court decided *Vincent Staub v Proctor
Hospital*, No. 09-400. While it's a USERRA discrimination case, that law
uses the "motivating factor" language found in most federal discrimination
laws so the application is likely far broader than just to military folk.
(although, maybe not applicable to ADEA)

Cat's Paw, as we all know (sorry, don't know the emoticon for
'tongue-in-cheek'), is a reference to a 17th century French fable, "The
Monkey & the Cat," in which a monkey convinces a cat to pull chestnuts from
a fire. Cat burns his paw; monkey takes off with the nuts. The case is about
discriminatory animus of non-decision-makers who feed bad info to an
animus-free decision maker that results in adverse action being taken. The
link to a good discussion is below:


Dr. Jeffrey P Feuquay, I/O Psychologist & Attorney
Managing Consultant, Psychology-Law Center, LLC
108 W. Walnut, Nevada, Mo 64772
ofc: 417-667-5076 cell: 417-549-0997

More information about the IPAC-List mailing list