Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: The Demise of the Chevron Doctrine – Part I
In That Case: Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo
Regulatory Uncertainty: Benefits-Related Legal Challenges in a Post-Chevron World — Troutman Pepper Podcast
The End of Chevron Deference: Implications of the Supreme Court's Loper Bright Decision — The Consumer Finance Podcast
Down Goes Chevron: A 40-Year Precedent Overturned by the Supreme Court – Diagnosing Health Care
#WorkforceWednesday® - Chevron Deference Overturned - Employment Law This Week®
AGG Talks: Healthcare Insights Podcast - Episode 3: The Future of Agency Deference in Healthcare Regulation
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Supreme Court Hears Two Cases in Which the Plaintiffs Seek to Overturn the Chevron Judicial Deference Framework: Who Will Win and What Does It Mean? Part II
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Will Chevron Deference Survive in the U.S. Supreme Court? An Important Discussion to Hear in Advance of the January 17th Oral Argument
Podcast: Chevron Deference: Is It Time for Change? - Diagnosing Health Care
Are You a Foreign Agent? [More with McGlinchey, Ep. 21
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 248: Listen and Learn -- Introduction to Homicide
VIDEO: Update on Third Party Workers’ Compensation Settlements in Pennsylvania
Jones Day Presents: Strategies for Dealing with the IRS: Alternative Dispute Resolution
Bill on Bankruptcy: Listening in the Dark at the NCBJ
'Gray Market' Lawyer: Congress Won't Change Copyright Laws
On August 23, 2024, in Restaurant Law Center v. DOL, the Fifth Circuit vacated the Department of Labor’s (DOL) final rule concerning tipped employees. Citing the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Loper Bright v. Raimondo,...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit recently vacated the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) latest provisions of its Tip Regulations Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, colloquially known as the 80/20/30 Rule through...more
On December 6, 2019, a sharply divided panel of the Second Circuit (covering New York, Connecticut, and Vermont) ruled that judicial approval of Fair Labor Standard Act (FLSA) settlements resolved under Federal Rule of Civil...more
On September 20, 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit ruled in Robert Kenney v. Helix TCS, Inc. that the Fair Labor Standards Act (FSLA) applies to workers in the cannabis industry. This is a...more
In two decisions issued on September 19, the Second Circuit relied on the Supreme Court’s instruction in Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro, 138 S. Ct. 1134, 1140 (April 2, 2018) that FLSA exemptions are not to be construed...more
For employers in the hospitality industry, tipping policies continue to pose significant litigation risks. A number of restaurant groups have faced recent class and collective action claims based on allegations that the...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The New York Court of Appeals holds that the state’s class action rules require notice of settlements to be sent to putative class members – even though no class has been certified....more
In a marked departure from the overwhelming success employers experienced before the Supreme Court in recent years, the less successful recently wrapped 2014-2015 term could be an indication that the judicial tides may be...more
On July 15, 2015, the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) issued an important Administrator’s Interpretation discussing the misclassification of employees as independent contractors. Many companies engage independent...more
Employment Law360 recently reported U.S. Wage and Hour Division Administrator David Weil's announcement that he will soon release an Administrator Interpretation stating "a very clear set of criteria" delineating the agency's...more
While much of Washington, DC, begins its preparations for the inevitable summer slowdown, the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division appears to be ramping up for a summer sure to keep wage and hour lawyers across the...more
For the past several years, an action by the Mortgage Bankers Association has been brewing in the courts challenging the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) for issuing contradictory opinion letters on whether mortgage loan...more
The Supreme Court recently rejected a challenge to the validity of a 2010 interpretation by the U.S. Department of Labor (the “DOL”), which had concluded that the administrative exemption of the Fair Labor Standards Act...more
In a March 9, 2015, decision in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Ass'n., the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that an interpretative rule issued by an administrative agency does not require notice and opportunity for comment,...more
The legal ping-pong match between the Department of Labor (DOL) and the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) over whether mortgage loan officers are eligible for overtime appears to be at an end. The Supreme Court recently...more
Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Assn., No. 13 1041: On Monday, March 9, 2015, the Court ruled that a longstanding decision from the DC Circuit under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) was incorrectly decided in contravention...more
On March 9, 2015, the United States Supreme Court ruled unanimously in two consolidated cases that a federal agency does not have to go through the formal rulemaking process, which includes providing public notice and an...more
Companies subject to federal agency regulations sometimes face situations where measures taken to comply with such rules work one day, and then result in violations of those rules the next. Federal administrative agencies...more
On March 9, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association, that the Department of Labor (DOL) may issue its interpretations of wage and hour regulations without seeking input from the...more
On March 9, 2015, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that when a federal administrative agency wants to amend or repeal an “interpretive rule,” it does not have to follow the notice-and-comment procedures set forth in the...more
On March 9, 2015, the Supreme Court wiped away a longstanding judicial doctrine that had placed greater procedural requirements on a federal agency when it changes its prior interpretation of a federal regulation....more
On March 9, 2015 the U.S. Supreme Court held that a federal agency is not required to engage in notice-and-comment rulemaking when it issues an interpretation of a regulation that is significantly different from its prior...more