Features

Recent rulings of interest to you and your practice.

Features

A rundown of significant recent developments in labor law.

A federal appeals court has put a $2.9 million employment lawsuit by a former investment banker on hold until the New York Court of Appeals can answer an undecided question of state law.

The explosion of employment claims in this country has resulted in an increased focus on resolving employment disputes prior to trial, in particular through mediation. Unfortunately, businesses and their managers often fail to appreciate why employment matters are particularly well-suited to mediation. This, in turn, discourages parties from participating meaningfully in mediation. The following article examines seven compelling reasons why mediation is such an attractive and viable option for prospective litigants.

Features

Recent rulings for your review.

Features

National cases of interest to you and your practice.

Many have noted the unanticipated consequences of Sarbanes Oxley's (SOX) whistleblower protection. One significant question has been how, in light of the statute's remedial nature but its focus on remedying securities fraud, courts should construe its definition of protected activity. In particular, courts (and the Department of Labor administrative law judges who generally hear these cases at the outset) have struggled with SOX's requirement that to be a protected whistleblower, the employee must complain about conduct that he or she 'reasonably believes constitutes a violation of ' any rule or regulation of the [SEC], or any provision of Federal law relating to fraud against shareholders' (<i>see</i> 18 U.S.C. ' 1514A).

Features

The United States Supreme Court has resolved a significant issue regarding coverage under Title VII: whether the 15-employee threshold for determining whether an individual or entity is an 'employer' covered by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a substantive element of plaintiff's claim for relief, or a jurisdictional issue. (Arbaugh v. Y &amp; H Corp., No. 04-944 (2006)). In Arbaugh, the Supreme Court, reversing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, held that the 15-employee threshold is an element of a plaintiff's claim that must be challenged prior to trial on the merits. The Supreme Court's decision is significant because evaluating the number of employees as a substantive issue would allow a federal court to exercise supplemental jurisdiction and to retain discretion to hear pendent state law claims even if it dismisses the federal claims for failure to state a claim.