Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. ”201-219 et. seq. , allows employees to sue their employers for various employment-related causes of action. While the FLSA applies only to “employers,” the Supreme Court has noted that the FLSA's definition of an “employee” has been characterized as “the broadest definition that has ever been included in any one act.” U.S. v. Rosenwasser, 323 U.S. 360 (1945). Consequently, it is not surprising that courts in two recent cases have ruled that actions brought, pursuant to the FLSA, by franchisees and franchisee employees, sufficiently alleged that franchisors were “employers” to withstand motions to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
Naik v. 7-Eleven Inc.
In Naik v. 7 Eleven Inc., Bus. Franchise Guide (CCH) '15, 332 (D.N.J. 2014), four franchisees of franchisor 7-Eleven Inc. contended that, despite being designated by the operative franchise agreement as “franchisees” and “independent contractors,” the economic reality of the relationship was that they were employees of 7-Eleven and, therefore, entitled to the protections of the FLSA; thus, they argued, they were authorized to assert claims for unpaid wages, minimum wages and overtime wages per this statute.
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?