Thank you for placing the lawsuit up on line as I could not locate it on the Register. If Nuesse wins this lawsuit, I see a lot of heads rolling from the city manager, law attorney, and all supervisors in the police department who signed a letter against her. I wonder how the supervisors are going to get out of this one when they sign a letter and then have to help her defense when it comes to telling the jury they witnessed Kline rub her shoulders. Oh, and don't forget Stahl who is the only city commissioners still seated over this mess. A clean sweep is coming.
Commissioners are taking Kline into executive session and I wonder what kind of spin they are going to put on this one. So Nuesse is being accused of not being truthful by Kline and look who is calling the kettle black. Something has to be done with Kline because if no punishment is forth coming, Kline will continue on. Can the commissioners really trust what he says? The commissioners have a big problem with Kline and they will always have to be double checking Kline in whatever he says. This just keeps getting better and better for the Nuesse case. Fold the cards and call an end to all this and roll some heads.
If this were such an obvious case the EEOC would have handled it themselves. At this point, this lawsuit is a onesided accusation. It has not been proven.
First, don't read into the EEOC not doing anything with this case. It RARELY finds "probable cause" (even in good cases) and even when it does, it even more rarely agrees to represent an individual (as opposed to a group of employees). The EEOC is an overrate hurdle that federal law requires employees to jump through - that's it.
Second, this complaint is a piece of junk. Seriously. At least Bailey could have gone online and found a decent complaint to copy. It's difficult to follow what exactly the causes of action are - that is, under what laws he is suing. They should be: Title VII (against the City only for gender discrimination and retaliation), Ohio R.C. Chapter 4112 (against the City and the employees for gender discrimation and retaliation - although bringing a claim against the employees individually is going to raise immunity issues that will really complicate and delay this lawsuit -although it does allow for punitive damages against them individually), 42 U.S.C. 1983 (not for due process through - she's getting that with the current hearing - for First Amendment retaliation, and I suppose if you're really grasping for straws, one could allege a civil conspiracy claim.
Kim Nuesse - if you're reading this - your attorney is out of his league in a federal civil employment action. I would hope he'd have realized that and at least teamed up with a real employment lawyer. If he hasn't, you need to find one. Otherwise your case is as good as lost.
4 comments:
Thank you for placing the lawsuit up on line as I could not locate it on the Register. If Nuesse wins this lawsuit, I see a lot of heads rolling from the city manager, law attorney, and all supervisors in the police department who signed a letter against her. I wonder how the supervisors are going to get out of this one when they sign a letter and then have to help her defense when it comes to telling the jury they witnessed Kline rub her shoulders. Oh, and don't forget Stahl who is the only city commissioners still seated over this mess. A clean sweep is coming.
Commissioners are taking Kline into executive session and I wonder what kind of spin they are going to put on this one. So Nuesse is being accused of not being truthful by Kline and look who is calling the kettle black. Something has to be done with Kline because if no punishment is forth coming, Kline will continue on. Can the commissioners really trust what he says? The commissioners have a big problem with Kline and they will always have to be double checking Kline in whatever he says. This just keeps getting better and better for the Nuesse case. Fold the cards and call an end to all this and roll some heads.
If this were such an obvious case the EEOC would have handled it themselves. At this point, this lawsuit is a onesided accusation. It has not been proven.
Two points from a legal perspective:
First, don't read into the EEOC not doing anything with this case. It RARELY finds "probable cause" (even in good cases) and even when it does, it even more rarely agrees to represent an individual (as opposed to a group of employees). The EEOC is an overrate hurdle that federal law requires employees to jump through - that's it.
Second, this complaint is a piece of junk. Seriously. At least Bailey could have gone online and found a decent complaint to copy. It's difficult to follow what exactly the causes of action are - that is, under what laws he is suing. They should be: Title VII (against the City only for gender discrimination and retaliation), Ohio R.C. Chapter 4112 (against the City and the employees for gender discrimation and retaliation - although bringing a claim against the employees individually is going to raise immunity issues that will really complicate and delay this lawsuit -although it does allow for punitive damages against them individually), 42 U.S.C. 1983 (not for due process through - she's getting that with the current hearing - for First Amendment retaliation, and I suppose if you're really grasping for straws, one could allege a civil conspiracy claim.
Kim Nuesse - if you're reading this - your attorney is out of his league in a federal civil employment action. I would hope he'd have realized that and at least teamed up with a real employment lawyer. If he hasn't, you need to find one. Otherwise your case is as good as lost.
Post a Comment