Firm: All
Practice Industry: Dispute Resolution, Employment & Labor
Region: All
Country/ State: All
Tag: All
Dykema | May 2019

When the Supreme Court accepted the cert petition to resolve a Circuit split regarding the False Claims Act’s statute of limitations when the government does not intervene, it created thepotential that the Court would extend the limitations periodfor private relators’ FCA actions. That is exactly what happened ...

Shoosmiths LLP | November 2021

In Lloyd v Google, the Supreme Court denied claims for mere 'loss of control' and ruled against mass class actions for data claims. Here, Philip Tansley and Matthew MacLachlan consider the court's reasoning and the broader implications for such claims. Case In its landmark judgment today, the Supreme Court unanimously held that a representative class action brought on behalf of approximately 4 ...

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP | July 2023

At the end of its 2023 term, the United States Supreme Court handed down several buzz-worthy decisions. Two opinions may have substantial and lasting impacts on employers and their efforts to promote diversity and inclusion. In Groff v. DeJoy, Postmaster General, the Court addressed religious accommodation and clarified the parameters of its “undue burden” standard set forth in its prior decision in Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison, 432 U. S. 63 (1977). 2023 U.S. LEXIS 2790 ...

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP | March 2024

“Public service is a noble calling” that requires great sacrifice, often requiring public officials to surrender personal conveniences in favor of public business ...

Debtors hoping to discharge their obligations in bankruptcy may find a new hurdle based on the US Supreme Court’s Feb. 22 ruling. Relying on the plain language of the Bankruptcy Code, and Congress’s use of passive voice, the Supreme Court held that funds obtained through fraud, regardless of who committed such fraud, are not dischargeable through bankruptcy ...

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP | December 2017

On December 11, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to accept an application to appeal the court of appeals decision in Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital, leaving unresolved a circuit split on whether federal law prohibits employment discrimination based on sexual orientation.[1] In Evans, the plaintiff, a security officer at a Georgia hospital, claimed she had been harassed and passed over for a promotion because she was homosexual ...

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP | July 2021

The Supreme Court, in Minerva Surgical, Inc., v. Hologic, Inc., et al., Case No. 20-440, recently upheld the doctrine of assignor estoppel, but severely limited its reach. The Court limited assignor estoppel to not apply in the cases of a “common employment arrangement” with an employer and employee, when there is a change in law, and when the issued patent has “materially broader” claims than the assigned invention ...

Hanson Bridgett LLP | June 2017

Last month, the Supreme Court decided TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, which narrowed the definition of where a corporate defendant "resides" for the purpose of suing it for patent infringement. In doing so, it overturned the 1994 holding of the Federal Circuit of what constitutes proper venue in patent infringement cases. Federal law allows a Plaintiff to bring a patent infringement suit against a defendant in any district where one of two conditions are met ...

Hanson Bridgett LLP | September 2020

Key Points A permitting agency's blanket designation of an entire category of permit decisions as ministerial for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) may be held to be improper if the agency has the ability to modify or deny the permit based on any concern that may be examined under CEQA review. Courts will afford a larger degree of deference to an agency’s designation of a single permit decision as ministerial on a case-by-case basis ...

Lawson Lundell LLP | August 2008

On July 17, 2008, the Supreme Court of Canada in Hydro-Québec v. Syndicat des employé-e-s de techniques professionnelles et de bureau d'Hydro-Québec, 2008 SCC 43 clarified that there are limits to the employer’s duty to accommodate ...

Lawson Lundell LLP | June 2008

On June 27, 2008, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) released its decision in Keays v. Honda Canada Inc. and overturned the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal and narrowed the scope of Wallace damages for the “bad faith” manner of dismissal. This decision arises from a decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice which awarded $500,000 in punitive damages to a dismissed employee in addition to 24 months salary in lieu of notice ...

Lavery Lawyers | July 2013

The Supreme Court of Canada recently rendered a divided decision in which it concluded that an employer’s policy imposing mandatory random alcohol testing was not justified.1 This decision is of interest to employers in Quebec since it confirms arbitral case law on the subject. Background In 2006, Irving Pulp & Paper, Ltd. (“Irving” or the “employer”) unilaterally adopted a policy on the consumption of alcohol and other drugs (the “policy”) ...

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP | February 2020

On February 19, 2020, The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Eastern district, issued its opinion in Roverano v. John Crane, Inc. and Brand Insulations, Inc. on two critical questions: 1. the applicability of the Pennsylvania Fair Share Act, 42 Pa.C.S. Section 7102, to strict liability asbestos cases pending in the Commonwealth’s courts; and 2. Inclusion of bankrupt entities on the verdict sheet for purposes of liability only ...

FISCHER (FBC & Co.) | July 2020

In March, due to the spread of the coronavirus (COVID-19) the Ministry of Health established that an employee required to quarantine at home in accordance with Ministry of Health guidelines would automatically receive a sick leave certificate which could present to the employer and receive sick pay for the quarantine period ...

Hanson Bridgett LLP | June 2017

On May 15, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed the long-standing federal policy favoring arbitration agreements. In a lawsuit brought against skilled nursing provider Kindred Nursing Centers, LP, the Court held that states cannot single out arbitration clauses for “disfavored treatment,” because doing so violates the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). The case involved two wrongful death lawsuits that were consolidated in the Kentucky Supreme Court ...

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP | July 2019

The Twenty-first Amendment—which repealed Prohibition—gives states broad authority to regulate alcohol within their borders. But can states impose residency requirements on alcohol retail licensees? The U.S. Supreme Court, by a vote of seven to two in Tennessee Wine and Spirits Retailers Ass’n v. Thomas, answered no. As state alcohol regulators adjust their licensing processes to comply with the ruling, retailers and wholesalers may see changes in the alcohol market ...

Dykema | June 2021

On June 17, the Supreme Court rejected another court challenge to the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”), holding that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge its minimum essential coverage provisions. For the third time, the Supreme Court upheld the ACA. More than a decade after the ACA was enacted, the long and winding road of ACA challenges may be over and healthcare industry participants may finally be able to rely on the ACA as settled law moving forward ...

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP | June 2020

On June 18, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) did not follow appropriate administrative procedures to terminate the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and, therefore, was unauthorized to do so. The decision was a 5-4 ruling, written by Chief Justice John Roberts and joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor ...

    Supreme Court Ruling Sets the Foundation for GST on Secondment of Employees     AUTHOR: Reena Asthana Khair Senior Partner and Head International Trade & Indirect Taxation Kochhar & Co. EMAIL: [email protected]   Japanese Multinational companies often share their talent pool across borders and jurisdictions by secondment of Japanese nationals ...

Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., et al, No. 20-440 (S. Ct. June 29, 2021) The Supreme Court issued a decision today upholding the validity of the doctrine of assignor estoppel and clarifying its proper limits. The Court held that the doctrine only applies when “the assignor’s claim of invalidity contradicts explicit or implicit representations he made in assigning the patent ...

United States v. Arthrex, Inc., et al, Appeal No. 2019-1434 (Fed. Cir. June 21, 2021) The Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision today on the constitutionality of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The Court held that the Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) who make up the majority of the PTAB are not constitutionally appointed under the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution ...

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP | July 2023

A month after nixing the “objectively reasonable interpretation” (Safeco) defense under the False Claims Act, the Supreme Court has vacated and remanded two other cases for further consideration of the defendant’s subjective state of mind when it filed payment claims with the government. The Fourth Circuit in Sheldon and the Eleventh Circuit in Olhausen will provide the first tests of the High Court’s newly minted FCA intent standard ...

Shoosmiths LLP | December 2022

The Supreme Court will decide if historic holiday pay claims can be brought where there are gaps of three months or more between a series of underpayments. The outcome could have significant implications for employers across the UK ...

Waller | January 2022

Today, the Supreme Court issued decisions in the COVID mandate cases that have had employers across the country on the edge of their seats. In aper curiam6-3 decision, the Court stayed the OSHA Emergency Temporary Standard that required all employers with 100 or more employees to require COVID vaccination or weekly testing ...

[!<CDATA[ This term the Supreme Court is set to resolve a circuit split over the extent of a federal district court’s power to order a person “who resides in or is found” in its district “to give testimony or statement or to produce a document or other thing for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal” pursuant to 28 U.S.C Section 1782(a) ...

dots