JONES DAY TALKS®: Women in IP: 2020 in Review and a Look Toward 2021
Jones Day Talks: Women in IP: The Supreme Court's "Copyright Day"
Bill on Bankruptcy: Lawyers Easily Make Simple Words Complicated
Bill on Bankruptcy: ResCap Report, a Bargain at $83 Million
As Expected, Noel Canning v. NLRB Headed to the Supreme Court
Bill on Bankruptcy: How Purchasers of AMR Stock Made a Killing
On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, a closely watched employment discrimination case. In a unanimous opinion written by Justice Kagan, the Court reversed the Eighth...more
Bringing positive news for employers and a welcome distraction from the COVID-19 crisis, the United States Supreme Court recently held that for claims of racial discrimination under Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of...more
Supreme Court Issues Unanimous Opinion Upholding But-For Causation in Section 1981 Discrimination Cases - The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a unanimous opinion holding that a plaintiff who sues for racial discrimination in...more
On March 23, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States, in Comcast Corp. v. National Association of African-American Owned Media, ruled that a plaintiff who alleges race discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 must plead and...more
In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court last week ensured that a high standard will be used when assessing whether claims of race discrimination under Section 1981 should advance past the early stages of litigation....more
Surrounded by the confusion and anxiety of the current COVID-19 pandemic, it may feel refreshing to step back and consider some of the basic tenets of employment law. The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Comcast Corp....more
In a unanimous decision issued on March 23, 2020, the United States Supreme Court held that a but-for causation standard applies to claims brought under Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The Supreme Court also...more
On Monday, March 23, the United States Supreme Court, in a nearly unanimous opinion, ruled that a plaintiff asserting race discrimination claims in the making of a contract under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Section 1981) bears the...more
Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act prohibits intentional race discrimination in all forms of contracting including employment. Lower courts have split as to whether a § 1981 plaintiff must prove that race was only one...more
This fall, the U.S. Supreme Court heard three employment cases that collectively ask: Does Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination “because of…sex,” encompass discrimination based...more
On August 15, 2019, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) added a question and answer to its list of frequently asked questions (FAQs) addressing, among other things, a growing concern for many employers: how to...more
On June 3, 2019, the United States Supreme Court ("Supreme Court") unanimously held in Fort Bend County v. Davis that federal courts may be able to hear claims brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title...more
If there has been one constant in employment law over the last generation, it is change. The forecast for 2019 is no different. In Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Texas Legislature, employers can expect developments that...more
On November 6, 2018, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Mount Lemmon Fire District v. Guido, 2018 WL 5794639 (2018), and held that state and local governments of any size are covered under the Age Discrimination in...more
U.S. Supreme Court Rules That All States and Political Subdivisions Must Comply With the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Regardless of Size - Due to a recent decision by the United States Supreme Court in Mount...more
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”) forbids employment discrimination against employees who are 40 years of age or older. Private employers with less than 20 employees are not subject to the ADEA....more
As members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community (LGBT+) are increasingly open at work about their identities, circuit courts are recognizing that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protects them from...more
In this episode of The Proskauer Brief, senior counsel Harris Mufson and associate Laura Fant discuss the latest developments in Title VII. We will discuss the two recent circuit court decisions concerning the scope of sex...more
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued an opinion in Zarda v. Altitude Express and held that Title VII provides protection from discrimination and harassment because of an individual’s sexual orientation. The...more
In a bit of a surprise move, the U.S. Supreme Court today passed on an opportunity to provide some long-awaited clarity on the interplay between sexual orientation and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In Evans v....more
Two recent federal district courts – from opposite sides of the Commonwealth – reached different conclusions on whether sexual orientation is a protected class under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”). On...more
In July 2015, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") published a guidance titled What You Should Know About EEOC and the Enforcement Protections for LGBT Workers, which took the position that employment...more
In a landmark en banc decision rejecting its earlier panel ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit became the first federal appellate court to hold that Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits...more
The stage has been set for the Supreme Court to consider whether sexual orientation is protected sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”). Sitting en banc last week, the Seventh Circuit...more
On April 4, 2017, an en banc decision in Hively v. Ivy Tech Community College, the Seventh Circuit became the first federal Court of Appeals to hold that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on...more