The FTC’s Rule Banning Non-Compete Agreements | What You Need to Know
The Chartwell Chronicles: Florida Workers' Compensation
The Chartwell Chronicles: New Jersey Caselaw Updates
The Maritime Anti-Corruption Network: An In-Depth Conversation
Policyholders vs. Insurers: 3 Arguments to Make When Selecting Defense Counsel & Hourly Rates
JONES DAY PRESENTS®: The Mechanics of Multidistrict Litigation: Streamlining Complex Cases
The Chartwell Chronicles: Medical Provider Claims
A General Overview of Maryland Workers' Compensation
Elements and Defenses to Claim Petitions
NGE On Demand: The (Dilatory) Forum Defendant Rule and Snap Removal with Nick Graber
Redefining Personal Jurisdiction: SCOTUS rules on the Ford Cases [More with McGlinchey Ep. 19]
Workers' Compensation Academy: 2020: A Unique Year in Many Ways Including Changes in New Jersey Workers’ Compensation
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 263: Listen and Learn -- Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Chapter 15 Bankruptcy Issues, Venue, and Jurisdiction by Kristhy Peguero and Jennifer Wertz
Podcast: CFIUS Update: Key Takeaways from the FIRRMA Implementing Regulations
Episode 116 -- Alstom Executive Convicted of FCPA and Money Laundering Offenses
[WEBINAR] Planning in the Coastal Zone
New anti-abuse provisions
Meritas Capability Webinar - Controlling Where to Fight and Who Pays for it?
As the lead agency for the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS or the Committee), the U.S. Department of the Treasury released new proposed rules on April 11, 2024 intended to enhance the enforcement...more
The California Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board (OSHAB) recently issued two decisions of interest to employers in California. In In re Calvary Chapel of San Jose, the Board examined issues concerning an inspection...more
The Supreme Court recently handed a victory to employers by giving them more tools to challenge federal agencies during administrative proceedings. Employers likely know how daunting it can seem to challenge federal officials...more
Key Takeaways: ..In Boechler P.C., v. Commissioner (“Boechler”), the Supreme Court held that the thirty-day period to petition the Tax Court for review of an adverse determination by the IRS Appeals Office in a collection...more
If you had asked us last week, we would have predicted that the Supreme Court’s momentous AMG Capital Management, LLC v. FTC decision last year, in which the Court struck down the Federal Trade Commission’s nearly 50-year...more
Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard; Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina, Nos. 20-1199, 21-707: These cases, involving the interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause...more
Another person or entity has applied for a trademark at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (the “USPTO”) that is similar to your trademark. What can you do? One option is to institute an opposition with the...more
El artículo 295 del Código de Minas Colombiano establecía que las acciones relacionadas con asuntos mineros diferentes a las acciones contractuales eran de competencia en única instancia del Consejo de Estado....more
Following a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court several months ago allowing a former employee to pursue a religious discrimination claim, a Texas federal jury recently ordered her former employer to pay her $350,000. The...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued three decisions this morning: Return Mail, Inc. v. Postal Service, No. 17-1594: The Patent Trial and Appeal Board was created by Congress in the Leahy-Smith America Invents...more
On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court held that an employee may be able to proceed with a federal discrimination lawsuit, even if the employee has not first filed a Charge of Discrimination with the Equal Employment...more
On June 3, 2019, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision holding that Title VII’s administrative exhaustion requirement is not a jurisdictional bar to filing a lawsuit in court. The lawsuit involved an individual, Lois...more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently delivered an important decision limiting an employer’s ability to dismiss federal employment discrimination lawsuits under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In Fort Bend County v....more
On Monday, June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Fort Bend County v. Davis, unanimously finding that Title VII’s administrative exhaustion requirement is not jurisdictional and that employers may forfeit...more
On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that the requirement set forth in Title VII to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that a plaintiff must first exhaust her administrative remedies with the EEOC before filing suit is...more
Resolving a circuit split regarding the jurisdictional nature of Title VII’s charge-filing requirement—the statutory requirement that an employee who alleges that he or she has been subjected to unlawful treatment is required...more
The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled today that Title VII’s administrative exhaustion requirement—whereby an aggrieved employee first must file a claim with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) or a state...more
On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Fort Bend County v. Davis that the requirement to file a charge of discrimination with the EEOC (or relevant state or local agency) is not a jurisdictional prescription to a...more
On June 3, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed a decision of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which held that employers in discrimination claims can waive their right to assert that the Plaintiff failed to...more
On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision, written by Justice Ginsberg, that filing an EEOC Charge is not “jurisdictional.” Fort Bend County, Texas v. Davis, No. 18-525 (June 3, 2019)....more
On June 3, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the precondition in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requiring employees to file a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)...more
On Monday, June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that federal courts can hear Title VII discrimination claims even if employees fail to first file with an administrative agency, such as the Equal Employment...more
On January 11, the U.S. Supreme Court accepted an appeal of a Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decision dealing with the administrative prerequisites for a plaintiff to file suit against an employer under Title VII and related...more
After significant deliberation and discussion, Congress passed and the president is expected to shortly sign the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 (FIRRMA), the first legislation in over a decade to...more