Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 412: Listen and Learn -- Motions for Summary Judgment
What Litigants Need to Know about Summary Judgment
JONES DAY TALKS®: Tiffany v. Costco Raises Trademark Infringement, Counterfeiting Questions
Patent Infringement: Successful Litigation Stays the "Course"
Podcast: Non-binding Guidance: Examining FDA’s Enforcement Authority Over Stem Cell Clinics and Compounders
K&L Gates Triage: Avoiding the Risks Associated with Mandatory Vaccination Programs
In a July 29, 2024, opinion, the California Supreme Court reaffirmed that a single use of a racial epithet can be severe enough to be actionable harassment under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA)....more
May 2024 NJ Supreme Court holds that non-disparagement provisions cannot prohibit disclosure of details relating to claims of discrimination, retaliation, or harassment - The New Jersey Supreme Court unanimously held that...more
If an employer or coworker persistently uses a transgender worker’s wrong name or identified pronoun, can that constitute a hostile work environment in violation of Title VII? In Copeland v. Georgia Department of Corrections,...more
Yesterday, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a summary judgment decision dismissing a former employee’s False Claims Act (“FCA”) retaliation suit. Lam v. Springs Window Fashions, LLC, No. 21-2665, 2022 U.S. App....more
Usually, once is not enough, at least in the hostile work environment context. Unless, as the court found in Ronnie L. Outlaw v. SBH Services, Inc., it is. Typically, a single incident of harassment – especially by a...more
Employers may be liable to their employees for harassment by non-employees under Title VII. Courts have found liability for this so-called “third-party harassment” in some of the following fact-specific contexts: waitresses...more
Courts have ruled that employees who work with clients with diminished capacity present different challenges when establishing whether the nonemployee’s alleged harassment affected the terms and conditions of the employee’s...more
Lest you think that no one can win a hostile work environment claim, we have some positive news from the Second Circuit. In Russell v. New York University, et al., the court issued a summary order (which does not have...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Under California law, obesity can qualify as a disability if it has a physiological cause and limits a major life activity. Proving such a claim has been difficult. The First District Court of Appeal’s...more
The California Court of Appeal recently held that employees’ workers’ compensation decisions barred them from pursuing similar claims under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) based on the doctrine of res judicata. ...more
As a general rule, of course, Human Resources Departments and company management want to be – and should be – well-informed about issues in the workplace, including employees unhappy enough to have raised claims of...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In Ly v. County of Fresno, the Court of Appeal held that correctional officers’ claims for race, ethnicity, and national origin discrimination were barred because the claims had been previously denied in...more
It turns out that “protected activity” sufficient to make out a retaliation claim in California is not as broad as it may sometimes seem. On November 9, 2016, the Court of Appeal affirmed summary judgment for the employer in...more
Most hostile environment harassment claims brought under Title VII involve allegations of offensive conduct by the plaintiff’s supervisors or co-workers. In a few situations, the employee alleges that his or her subordinates...more