In That Case: Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy
The Justice Insiders Podcast: Jarkesy’s Implications for the Administrative State
5 Key Takeaways | ITC Litigation and Enforcement Conference
Recent Trends in Article III Standing - The Consumer Finance Podcast
AGG Talks: Background Screening - A Refresher on Responding to Consumer File Requests under Section 609 of the FCRA
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS in Review, Biden Acts to Limit Non-Competes, NY HERO Act Model Safety Plans - Employment Law This Week®
SCOTUS Watch: The ACA and Key Health Law Areas Justice Barrett Could Impact - Diagnosing Health Care Podcast
Podcast: Texas v. United States of America
Polsinelli Podcasts - Supreme Court Closes Gap on Bankruptcy Issue
On August 1, 2024, in Turrieta v. Lyft et al., the California Supreme Court held that a plaintiff in a Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) action does not have a right to intervene -- or to object to or vacate a judgment...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit released its much-anticipated follow-up decision in American Alliance for Equal Rights v. Fearless Fund Management, LLC, on June 3, 2024. The case has been closely watched by...more
On February 12, 2024, in Johnson v. Lowe’s Home Centers, LLC, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that an employee’s non-arbitrable, representative PAGA claims are not subject to dismissal when the plaintiff is ordered to...more
On January 11, the Massachusetts Court of Appeals ordered that an employee has standing to sue in state court, despite lacking standing to sue in a federal court. The employee (plaintiff) sued a prospective employer for...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: As reported here, for the two-year anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings regarding Article III standing in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez (“TransUnion”), the Workplace Class Action blog is providing a...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court has held that a plaintiff whose individual PAGA claims are compelled to arbitration retains standing to pursue representative PAGA claims in court. Adolph v. Uber Technologies,...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court held that a plaintiff whose individual PAGA claims are compelled to arbitration retains standing to pursue representative PAGA claims in court in Adolph v. Uber Technologies,...more
In a highly anticipated ruling, the California Supreme Court has held that employees may still have standing to sue for Labor Code violations in a representative capacity, even when their individual claims have been compelled...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In Braidwood Management, Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Fifth Circuit endorsed for-profit employers integrating their religious beliefs into their employment policies to apply the...more
This week, the Court addresses the constitutionality of a nearly $1 billion statutory damages award under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and revives a California state law whistleblower claim. The Court...more
A federal judge in New York recently held that workers cannot assert claims for violations of New York’s Wage Theft Prevention Act (WTPA) in federal court – a ruling that further helps employers defend against these...more
On April 4, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit joined the Ninth Circuit in holding that a plaintiff lacked Article III standing to prosecute her statutory claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)...more
On February 11, 2022, the 9th Circuit issued its decision in Saucillo v. Peck, — F.4th —, 2022 WL 414692 (9th Cir. 2022), holding among other things that a nonparty aggrieved employee does not have standing in federal court...more
A federal appeals court ruled it will not lift a ban in three states on President Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for federal contractors. On Jan. 5, 2022, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals refused to stay an injunction...more
This week, the Court considered the retroactivity of California’s Proposition 22—which designates “app-based drivers” as independent contractors under certain conditions—and addressed the requirements for Clean Water Act...more
Anyone who has considered filing a petition for writ of mandate from a superior court ruling knows the odds are not in favor of the court granted this extraordinary relief. Apart from clear error, the requirement of showing...more
Magadia v. Wal-Mart Associates, Inc., No. 19-16184, 2021 WL 2176584 (9th Cir., May 28, 2021) - Summary: An employee lacks Article III standing to bring a PAGA claim in federal court for Labor Code violations that the...more
On May 28, 2021, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals handed Walmart a groundbreaking win in a wage-and-hour class and California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA") action. Reversing a nearly $102 million...more
The Sixth Circuit, in a split decision, held that a dispute between a union and an employer regarding retiree healthcare benefits was not arbitrable because the issue of retiree healthcare benefits was not encompassed within...more
In Ramirez v. Trans Union, the Ninth Circuit addressed whether, at the class certification stage of a putative class case, only the named plaintiff or all class members must have Article III standing (i.e., a concrete injury...more
Editor's Overview - Happy New Year. We wrap-up 2019 with an article that reflects on significant developments in ERISA litigation during 2019, and takes a look at what's on the horizon for 2020. The courts (at all levels)...more
A California federal court decertified a class of millions of Walmart employees after concluding that the named plaintiffs lacked Article III standing to bring their challenge to the employer’s use of background checks....more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In the latest battle of the multi-year showdown between the State of Texas and the EEOC – whereby Texas asserted that the EEOC’s 2012 “Enforcement Guidance on the Consideration of Arrest and Conviction...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Employment-related cases pending before the California Supreme Court concern various questions that sometimes seem technical, but the answers they elicit will have big consequences. ...more
Could there be a split brewing with regard to standing to pursue FCRA claims against potential employers for violating the stand-alone disclosure requirement contained in 15 U.S.C. § 1681(b)(2)(A)(i)? Maybe....more