Tag Archives: Supreme Court

Greenberg Traurig Attorneys Jeffrey Mamorsky and Jonathan Sulds’ Pen ERISA Column in Pensions and Investments

Whether the 5-4 Supreme Court decision in Thole vs. U.S. Bank on June 1 is “good news” for employers and will limit lawsuits by defined benefit participants, as some commentators have forecast, remains to be seen. From the perspective of advising fiduciaries how to discharge their responsibilities and avoid litigation, however, what the majority opinion … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Rules Title VII protects LGBT+ Employees from Workplace Discrimination: Practical Implications for Employers

What do a gay child-welfare advocate from Georgia, a transgender funeral home employee from Michigan, and a gay skydiving instructor from New York have in common? According to the Supreme Court of the United States, they were all discriminated against in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) when their … Continue Reading

Recapping the Many Legal Developments Affecting Private Employers in New York and New Jersey, So Far, in 2019

There have been many significant developments in the first half of 2019 impacting private employers in New York and New Jersey. Federal, state, and local legislatures and agencies have been particularly busy in the employment arena, promulgating sweeping laws and regulations affecting a broad range of well-entrenched employment practices. For instance, New Jersey adopted prohibitions … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Rejects Practice of Construing Fair Labor Standards Act Exemptions Narrowly

On April 2, 2018, in a 5-4 decision, the United States Supreme Court held that automobile service advisors are not entitled to overtime pay. Although the precise holding is of limited application because few companies outside car dealerships employ individuals as automobile service advisors, the Supreme Court’s analysis will have wide-reaching application. Departing from years … Continue Reading

The DOJ’s Evolving View of the Interplay Between the Federal Arbitration Act and the National Labor Relations Act

Employers in the gaming and hospitality arena are eagerly awaiting the results of the upcoming changes to the legal landscape that are expected to emerge from a business-oriented administration. These employers have long tried to reduce the costs and length of litigation, particularly in the context of wage and hour claims, by requiring employees to … Continue Reading

SCOTUS to Resolve Circuit Split Over Dodd-Frank Whistleblowers

On Monday, June 26, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review whether the Dodd-Frank Act (DFA) prohibits retaliation against internal whistleblowers or only covers individuals who report to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC).  This question has divided practitioners and lower courts alike since Dodd-Frank’s passage in 2010. As reported in our previous … Continue Reading

Ninth Circuit Widens Circuit Split on Whether Dodd-Frank Protects Internal Whistleblowing

Introduction On March 8, 2017, in Somers v. Digital Realty Trust Inc., No.15-cv-17352 (9th Cir., March 8, 2017), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s denial of the defendant’s motion to dismiss a whistleblower claim brought under the Dodd-Frank Act’s (“DFA”)’s anti-retaliation provision. In a 2-1 decision, the majority endorsed the approach … Continue Reading

“Nothing so Exhilarating as Being Shot at Without Result”—California Pay Day Statements and Accrued Vacation

What does Winston Churchill have to do with California wage and hour requirements? Well, the “shot” at employers in Soto v. Motel 6 Operating L.P. at the California Court of Appeal was whether, because California vacation pay cannot be forfeited and must be paid out at termination, it therefore follows that the value of the … Continue Reading

Trial by Formula Revisited: Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Bouaphakeo and the Future of Wage & Hour Class Actions

Some important Supreme Court cases are hard to accurately capture in a sound bite, and this is one of them. In a narrow holding, the Supreme Court issued a 6-2 decision in Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Bouaphakeo, 577 U.S. ___ (2016), addressing class claims for overtime compensation certified under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 … Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court Holds that Unaccepted Offer to Settle Per Rule 68 Does Not Moot a Case

In a 6-3 opinion, the United States Supreme Court held yesterday that a defendant’s unaccepted Rule 68 offer of judgment for complete relief does not moot a case. See Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, 577 U.S. ___ (2016). Justice Bader Ginsburg, writing for the 6-3 majority, explained that “[u]nder basic principles of contract law,” an offer … Continue Reading

The End of Class Arbitration?

Many employers require that employees agree in writing to arbitrate any disputes that may arise in connection with their employment. The reason is simple: arbitrating employment disputes usually is less expensive and provides a quicker resolution than litigation. However, like litigation, arbitration can sometimes be unpredictable. This presents a problem because, unlike litigation, it is … Continue Reading
LexBlog