News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Termination

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP

IP Alert: Are Terminal Disclaimers Destined for Termination?

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP on

July 17, 2024 Applicant-submitted terminal disclaimers tie similar co-owned patents to a common expiration date and typically serve to ensure that a later-filed continuation application lives no longer than its parent. The...more

Morgan, Brown & Joy, LLP

The U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies the Legal Standard for the NLRB Seeking Preliminary Injunctions Against Employers

Morgan, Brown & Joy, LLP on

On June 13, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued Starbucks v. McKinney,1 which clarifies the legal standard governing temporary injunctions sought by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board) against employers alleged...more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

The man who said "no" to DEI training, and four lessons for employers

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP on

Employer's DEI mandate scores a win. A white guy refused to take his employer's mandatory "unconscious bias" training, and he was fired. He sued the employer for retaliation, his lawsuit was dismissed, and this week an...more

Littler

Littler Lightbulb: June Appellate Roundup

Littler on

This Littler Lightbulb highlights some of the more significant employment law developments at the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts of appeal in the last month....more

Gould + Ratner LLP

Should the Standard for Obtaining Preliminary Injunctions Under the NLRA Be Easier? The U.S. Supreme Court Weighs In...

Gould + Ratner LLP on

In a 9-0 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court recently sided with Starbucks Corp. over the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in a decision that would severely delay the process for the NLRB to obtain preliminary injunctions...more

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP

Supreme Court Sides with Starbucks in Long-Awaited Union Battle: Implications for Employers and Employees

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP on

In an eight-to-one decision this month, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Starbucks in Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney, involving a longstanding legal battle against the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The NLRB was...more

McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC

Supreme Court Imposes Tighter Standard for NLRB to Obtain Injunctive Relief

McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC on

The Supreme Court of the United States recently unanimously ruled against the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) in Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney. The decision reversed the NLRB’s attempt to change the standard for...more

ArentFox Schiff

In Win for Employers, Supreme Court Adopts Stricter Test for NLRB Injunctions

ArentFox Schiff on

The US Supreme Court, in an 8-1 decision in Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney, ruled that federal district courts must apply a traditional four-factor test when evaluating requests for injunctive relief brought by the National...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

US Supreme Court Applies Strict Test for NLRB Injunctions

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on

In unusual circumstances arising during unionization campaigns, the National Labor Relations Board can seek a so-called Section 10(j) injunction to immediately order the employer or union to cease illegal acts associated with...more

Tucker Arensberg, P.C.

Does U.S. Supreme Court Decision in Favor of Starbucks Signal Greater Restriction on the Powers of the National Labor Relations...

Tucker Arensberg, P.C. on

Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney, Regional Director of Region 15 of the National Labor Relations Board, decided on June 13, 2024, arose out of the discharge of several Starbucks employees who formed a union organizing committee...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Supreme Court Hands Starbucks Win Against National Labor Relations Board

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On June 13, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Starbucks’ favor in Starbucks v. The National Labor Relations Board, holding that when seeking a Section 10(j) preliminary injunction under the National Labor Relations Act...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Addresses 10(j) Injunction Standard in NLRB Case

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

In an 8-1 decision authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, the United States Supreme Court settled the conflict among circuits in setting the standard for issuing 10(j) injunctions sought in unfair labor practice proceedings. In...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

NLRB Must Satisfy Traditional Preliminary Injunction Standards To Secure Section 10(j) Relief Against an Employer Pending...

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP on

In Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) must satisfy the traditional preliminary injunction standard established in Winter v. Natural Resources Defense...more

Buchalter

A Win for Employers: New SCOTUS Decision Raises the Bar for the NLRB in Seeking Preliminary Injunctions Against Employers Charged...

Buchalter on

On Thursday, June 13, 2024, in Starbucks Corp. v. M. Kathleen McKinney, Case No. 23-367, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that district courts must apply a strict, four-factor test when adjudicating requests for preliminary...more

Sherman & Howard L.L.C.

SCOTUS Benchslaps NLRB & Its Uneven Playing Field

Sherman & Howard L.L.C. on

Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA") equips the National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB" or “Board”) with a powerful tool to address supposed unfair labor practices during the pendency of a Board unfair...more

Miller Canfield

Michigan Supreme Court Expands Liability Under Anti-Discrimination Statute; Endorses Third-Party Retaliation Theory

Miller Canfield on

“Third party” or “associational” retaliation is reprisal taken by an employer against someone other than the person who engaged in “protected conduct.” In 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Title VII’s anti-retaliation...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

Dismissal of Representative PAGA Claim Vacated Following Adolph v. Uber Techs.

Proskauer - California Employment Law on

Johnson v. Lowe’s Home Centers, LLC, 93 F.4th 459 (9th Cir. 2024) - The Ninth Circuit vacated a district court’s dismissal of a former employee’s “non-individual” Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims in the wake of...more

Baker Donelson

U.S. Supreme Court Sides with SOX Whistleblower in Murray v. UBS Securities

Baker Donelson on

On February 8, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously decided that an employee who blows the whistle under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) does not need to show that their employer had retaliatory intent to find...more

Sherman & Howard L.L.C.

Supreme Court Confirms Corporate Whistleblowers Don't Have to Prove Retaliatory Intent

Sherman & Howard L.L.C. on

Tackling the tricky issue of how a plaintiff proves an employer's “intent,” in an opinion issued today, the United States Supreme Court unanimously held that under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, corporate whistleblowers have...more

Benesch

Starbucks Union Dispute Reaches Supreme Court

Benesch on

On Friday, January 12, the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal from Starbucks on a case involving the termination of seven Memphis, Tennessee employees....more

Vinson & Elkins LLP

Supreme Court Set to Review Burden of Proving Retaliatory Intent in SOX Whistleblower Suits: Employee or Employer?

Vinson & Elkins LLP on

On May 1, 2023, the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC.1 There, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that an employee whistleblower suing under the...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

What Does Affirmative Action’s Death Knell Mean for Employers?

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

At the end of June, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows Of Harvard College, Nos. 20-1199 & 21-707, 2023 WL 4239254 (U.S. June 29, 2023), outlawed race-based...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

The Practical NLRB Advisor: Winter 2023

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,... on

Ogletree Deakins’ Traditional Labor Relations Practice Group is pleased to announce the publication of the Winter 2023 issue of the Practical NLRB Advisor. This issue provides an overview of a host of controversial decisions...more

Sherman & Howard L.L.C.

New SCOTUS Case Augurs Toward More Prayer in Public Employment Settings

Sherman & Howard L.L.C. on

The U.S. Supreme Court issued a blockbuster school prayer decision Monday in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District. The case involved a public high school football coach who was fired for praying on the field after each game,...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

U.S. Supreme Declines to Resolve Circuit Split on False Claims Act Anti-Retaliation Provisions

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to settle a split among federal appeal courts on whether former employees are covered by whistleblower anti-retaliation protections contained in the False Claims Act (FCA). United States ex...more

58 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3
Next »

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide