Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Dismantled Weapon of 'A Good Deed Never Goes Unpunished'
The employment lawyer's adage that “no good deed goes unpunished” was thrown into sharp relief by the Sixth Circuit recently when it held that telecommuting ' even when offered to other employees ' is not necessarily a reasonable accommodation for a disabled employee. Reversing a divided panel, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Eastern District of Michigan Court's grant of summary judgment to Ford Motor Company (Ford) in a claim of disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). E.E.O.C. v. Ford Motor Co., Case No. 12-2484, 2015 WL 1600305 (6th Cir. Apr. 10, 2015).
Background
Jane Harris was a resale buyer who had worked for Ford for over six years. Harris suffered from irritable bowel syndrome, which gave her uncontrollable diarrhea and fecal incontinence. Her job at Ford was “highly interactive” and required her to meet with suppliers at their businesses, and with Ford employees and stampers at the Ford plant. Indeed, because resale buyers needed to meet with stampers often and with short notice, Ford had officed the resale buyers in the same building as its stampers for years. While Harris had been a strong performer when she first started at Ford, in her fourth year of employment, she was rated in the bottom 25% of her peers. In her fifth and sixth years of employment, these same performance issues were still evident, and she was rated in the bottom 10% of her peer group two years in a row. These low ratings were due to her lack of interpersonal skills, her late delivery of work, her lack of concern for quality, and her failure to communicate with suppliers.
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.
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.
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?