News & Analysis as of

False Claims Act (FCA) › Retaliation › Age Discrimination in Employment Act

Fisher Phillips

Third Circuit Confirms “But-For” Standard for Retaliation Claims Under the False Claims Act

Fisher Phillips on

Last month, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals held that an employee’s protected activity must be the “but for” cause of an adverse action to support a claim for retaliation under the False Claims Act (“FCA”). The Court...more

PilieroMazza PLLC

And the False Claims Act Makes Three – 3rd Circuit Applies the More Employer-Friendly Title VII Retaliation and ADEA “But-for”...

PilieroMazza PLLC on

She was a director of marketing for a drug company who had received a performance improvement plan to address issues related to her relationships with co-workers and supervisors. But she had also raised concerns about the...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

California Employment Law Notes - September 2015

Proskauer - California Employment Law on

Newly Enacted California Statutes - The Word "Alien" Is Stricken From The California Labor Code - Section 1725 of the California Labor Code defines "alien" as "any person who is not a born or fully naturalized...more

Proskauer - Whistleblowing & Retaliation

How U.S. Supreme Court Ruling On Title VII Retaliation Standard Case May Affect Claims Under Whistleblower & Other...

Proskauer - Whistleblowing & Retaliation on

“But-for” or “mixed motive” is a causation question not unknown to the U.S. Supreme Court. In Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228 (1989), a plurality held that the anti-discrimination provision of Title VII only...more

4 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide