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
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
On December 6, 2023, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, a Title VII case out of the Eighth Circuit. The petitioner, Sergeant Jatonya Muldrow of the St. Louis Police Department, alleged sex...more
Legal precedent, including language from the U.S. Supreme Court, requires federal courts to take a broad view of the “but-for” causation standard for determining unlawful age discrimination in the workplace, Equal Employment...more
Arguing the decades-old analysis is no longer helpful to anyone, Reginald Sprowl petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to scrap application of the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting analysis in Title VII race discrimination and...more
Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, 140 S. Ct. 1731 (2020) - Summary: Title VII prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity....more
This month's key California employment law cases involve EEOC charges, disability discrimination, and meal breaks....more
Since 1990, the U.S. Supreme Court has expressly construed a neutral law of general applicability as consistent with the free exercise clause. Deeming Colorado's public accommodations law just such a law, the Colorado Court...more
In 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States held that plaintiffs claiming retaliation under Title VII must prove that “but for” the retaliation they would not have been discharged. University of Texas Southwestern Medical...more
Last Wednesday the U.S. Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS), which involves a claim of pregnancy discrimination under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA)....more
In a previous post, we discussed the importance of Kwan v. The Andalex Group LLC, – F.3d – (2d Cir. 2013) as it related to the likelihood of obtaining summary judgment on Title VII retaliation claims in the aftermath of the...more