Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Supreme Court Adopts EEOC Guidance on Who Is 'Employee'
The United States Supreme Court has held that a determination of who is an 'employee' of a professional medical corporation for federal anti-discrimination law purposes rests on Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guidance, which focuses on the common law's emphasis on right to control. Clackamas Gastroenterology Associates v. Wells, 123 S. Ct. 1673; 155 L. Ed. 2d 615 (U.S. May 24).
In so holding, the high court remanded Deborah Wells' American with Disabilities Act suit against Clackamas Gastroenterology Associates to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to rule on whether shareholders were employees based on the EEOC test. The Ninth Circuit had held that the physician-shareholders of Clackamas Gastroenterology Associates were technically 'employees' that could be counted towards the minimum number of employees necessary to bring a company within the ambit of the ADA.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?