Lateral Transfers: 'Adverse Actions'?
August 25, 2003
Retaliation claims are the growth industry of employment discrimination law. According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the number of reprisal charges filed with the agency has ballooned from under 11,000 in 1992 to more than 22,000 in 2002, rising steadily during that period from 15% to 27% of all EEOC charges.
How to Avoid a 'Runaway Jury'
August 25, 2003
In the wake of several United States Supreme Court decisions, many employers have implemented mandatory arbitration procedures in order to avoid costly federal and state law employment discrimination trials. The idea that arbitration offers a cheaper alternative and avoids the possibility of a 'runaway jury' has considerable appeal for employers who are now subject to a host of employment discrimination and other workplace protection statutes.
Recent Developments from Around the States
August 25, 2003
National cases of interest to your practice.
Great DNA! You're Hired
August 25, 2003
Advances in genetic science have repeatedly grabbed headlines recently, from cloned calico cats to specially engineered food crops to promises that parents will soon be able to choose the physical characteristics of their future children. With the steady advance of technology and the increasing ease with which genetic material can be collected and analyzed, it is little wonder that some employers are contemplating using genetic testing as part of the employment process.
Anti-Harassment Policy and Training: More Important Than Ever
August 25, 2003
A recent decision by the Supreme Court of New Jersey serves as a powerful reminder to employers that in order to attempt to insulate themselves from liability for harassment claims, an anti-harassment policy must be more than the 'mere words' contained therein. .
BIT PARTS
August 24, 2003
Malpractice Suit to Continue. The New York Supreme Court, Sullivan County, has decided that a legal malpractice suit can proceed against the firm Proskauer Rose. Plunket v. Hart, 185202 (Jan. 24). The malpractice and breach-of-contract action was filed by Andrea Plunket, the administrator of the literary properties of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, after a Manhattan federal court ordered her to pay $135,521 in attorney fees and costs for bringing what the federal court concluded was an objectively unreasonable copyright and trademark infringement suit against the estate of Doyle's daughter. Proskauer Rose had unsuccessfully argued standing, forum and joinder of parties issues on behalf of Plunket in the federal case.
COURTHOUSE STEPS
August 24, 2003
CASE CAPTION: John Densmore, individually and on behalf of California general partnerships comprised of John Densmore, the Estate of James Morrison, the Estate of Pam Courson, Raymond Manzarek and Robert Krieger v. Raymond Manzarek, Robert Krieger, Ian Astbury and Stewart Copeland, L.A. Superior Court # BC289730.
CLAUSE AND EFFECT
August 24, 2003
For-cause termination clauses, often used by corporations ' including entertainment and media companies ' in employment contracts with corporate executives, typically give an executive a period of time to cure after he or she receives notice from the employer of an alleged contract breach. At-will contracts may simply provide for advance notice before an employee can be discharged. In California, the measure of damages for termination without notice in employment-at-will contracts is income the discharged executive lost during the length of the notice period (eg, 30 days). However, the Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate Division, recently held in an unpublished opinion addressing a lack of notice required under a for-cause termination clause that the measure of damages should be based on the length of the notice period only if the executive was discharged for grounds specified in the for-cause clause. Hoffman v. Harmony Pictures Inc., B152774 (Dec. 4).
Implications of 'Eldred' Ruling
August 24, 2003
The recent US Supreme Court decision upholding the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA) ' which added 20 years to existing and future copyright terms ' has been hailed as an important victory for major studios and other entertainment copyright holders. Eldred v. Ashcroft, 123 S.Ct. 769 (Jan. 15). This is especially so given both the Court's clear deference to what Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for the majority, acknowledged was the 'unbroken congressional practice' of extending US copyright terms and the entertainment industry's strong lobbying presence in Washington, DC. But other critical copyright issues facing the entertainment industry may be impacted but not resolved by the Eldred ruling.
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- Co-ops and CondominiumsCount Invokes Business Judgment Rule to Uphold Fines Imposed By Co-Op BoardRead More ›
- Real Property LawQuestions of Fact About Compliance With Mortgage Contingency ClauseMortgagee Who Purchased At Foreclosure Sale Failed to Establish Bona Fide Purchaser StatusSupreme Court Was Premature In Holding That Option Violated Rule Against PerpetuitiesRead More ›
- DevelopmentDeveloper’s Taking Claims Survive Motion to DismissDEC Incorrectly Granted Permit to Expand Nonconforming Mining UseMemorandum of Understanding Not Binding on Subsequent Town BoardRead More ›
- City of Yes: Housing Opportunity — A Little Bit Of Everything, EverywhereNew York City’s recently adopted City of Yes for Housing Opportunity (CHO) represents the most significant overhaul of residential zoning regulations in decades. The interplay between existing procedures and new provisions will likely generate significant interpretive questions and litigation as developers seek to take advantage of these opportunities.Read More ›