Skip to main content

Are you a legal professional? Visit our professional site

Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

EEOC v. Go Daddy Software, Inc., No. 07-16190

By FindLaw Staff on September 10, 2009 4:30 PM

In an action by the EEOC claiming that defendant terminated an employee in retaliation for engaging in protected activity, judgment for plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) there was sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to conclude that plaintiff complained of discrimination based on his religion; and 2) the jury could reasonably conclude that the employee had the option of returning to his original sales position at defendant company.

Read EEOC v. Go Daddy Software, Inc., No. 07-16190

Judges

Opinion by Judge W. Fletcher

Dissent by Judge Noonan

Counsel

For Appellant:

Fred W. Alvarez, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., Palo Alto, CA

Michael J. Nader, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., Palo Alto, CA

For Appellee:

James M. Tucker, EEOC, Washington, DC

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard