Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A long-time employee with a track record of success witnesses and discloses what she believes to be unlawful activity at her company, ABC Corp. Her relationship with management sours and, after a brief attempt at dispute resolution paid for by the company, she is soon after “down-sized” in a reduction in force (RIF).
Ready to move on, the employee begins applying for new positions, but cannot gain any traction. She learns that, in addition to informing potential employers about the RIF, ABC Corp. has falsely criticized the employee's performance. The employee later learns that her security clearance is in jeopardy because ABC provided misleading information to the Department of Defense (DOD). Next, the employee receives a 1099 in the mail in which ABC attributes to her as earned income the costs of the pre-RIF attempt at dispute resolution. Finally, ABC serves the employee with a multi-count complaint alleging violation of trade secrets, conversion, tortious interference, and other baseless causes of action.
From the perspective of employee counsel, it is important to understand how to proceed given this hypothetical but plausible scenario. The kitchen-sink approach is available ' allege everything and fight for each claim to the bitter end. But that is a costly proposition for the client and time consuming for the attorney. The better approach, in our estimation, is to focus your efforts on only those claims, and identify only those acts by the employer, that a court is likely to find “adverse actions” under the applicable statute. In addition to saving you time and your client money, this strategy will ultimately help to establish your credibility with the court.
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?