Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Counterclaims: Actionable Retaliation?
An employee sues his former employer for ERISA violations and for unpaid commissions. The employer counterclaims, alleging various tort and statutory violations committed by the now former employee. Just another litigant asserting its right to seek redress in court. Right. Not according to the court in Kreinik v. Showbran Photo, Inc., 2003 WL 22339268 (S.D.N.Y. 10/14/03) (Freeman, M.J.) Rather, the court found that the employer's action in filing counterclaims under New York's Labor Law may constitute unlawful retaliation under both ERISA and the Labor Law.
Actionable Retaliation Claims
An actionable retaliation claim requires an “adverse employment action.” The employer argued that no adverse employment action was present because the counterclaim did not have a nexus to the employee's employment. The court ruled, however, that “retaliatory actions injurious to a plaintiff's ability to secure future employment are actionable.” The question for the court then, on the employer's motion to dismiss, was did the counterclaims impact on the employee's future employment opportunities?
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
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.
The Article 8 Opt In
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.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
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?
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.