Dianne W. Cassano v. Allen Carb, Arnold Lessor, North Shore Veterinary Surgery, Twelve John and Jane Does, Individually, Docket No. 04-6712-Cv

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that “[w]e agree 8 with the reasoning” of Seaworth, Sutton, and Yisrael
• explaining that the plaintiff’s 17 “reliance on anti-discrimination statutes is misplaced because defendants' policy 18 of requiring SSNs applied equally to all employees and was also a necessary 19 consequence of defendants' obligations under federal law”
• adopting the reasoning of the Eighth and Ninth Circuits that a religious accommodation that would violate an employer’s legal obligations constitutes an undue burden under Title VII
• rejecting equal protection claim because the collection of social security numbers is neutrally applied, those who refuse to disclose their numbers for fear of identify theft are not a protected class, and the laws requiring the collection of social security numbers have a rational basis
• \We . . . agree with the District Court's conclusion that the Constitution does not provide a right to privacy in one's [social security number].\
• “federal law requires that employers gather and report the SSNs of their employees to aid enforcement of tax and immigration laws”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).