Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Almost every employer has experienced it: the employee who suddenly seems a little “off,” the rumors circulating among the co-workers that he is “odd,” “strange” or “crazy,” and then the resulting concerns from employees who are uncomfortable around, or fearful of, the labeled employee. Employers who take action because there are rumors that the employee is “crazy,” “psycho” or “nuts” often find themselves the subject of an Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) lawsuit facing claims that they regarded the individual as mentally disabled. What's an employer to do? How an employer handles concerns about an employee may be the difference between an amicable work environment and a lengthy and costly lawsuit.
The 'Regarded As' Prong 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
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.