News & Analysis as of

Sexual Harassment Vicarious Liability

Blurred Lines: Texas Supreme Court Applies Hazy Distinction Between Workplace Harassment And Assault

by Fisher Phillips on

The Texas Supreme Court recently blurred the distinctions between harassment and assault claims as they apply to employer liability under the state’s antidiscrimination statute. In considering whether a plaintiff is required...more

Drafting Franchise Agreements After Patterson v. Domino’s : Avoiding the Minefield of Vicarious Liability and Joint Employment

by Snell & Wilmer on

Lauded as one of the most important franchise cases in the recent past, Patterson v. Domino’s established a new standard for addressing vicarious liability issues in California. In reaching its decision that Domino’s was not...more

NY Transit Agencies Escape Vicarious Liability for Contractors Alleged Discrimination

by Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP on

It is not uncommon for companies to contract their daily business operations to third-party companies. In Motta et al v. Global Contact Services, Inc., the court addressed whether such relationships relieve the outsourcing...more

The Contours of a Franchisor’s Vicarious Liability

by LeClairRyan on

In a ruling that reflects a clear understanding of the distinction between the roles of the franchisor and franchisee, the Appeals Court of Massachusetts recently held that Domino’s was not vicariously liable for the acts of...more

Summary of California Appellate Decisions -August 2015

Insurance; Duty To Defend; Insurance Coverage; Intentional Acts; Sexual Misconduct - Gonzalez v. Fire Insurance Exchange (2015) 234 Cal.App.4th 1220, 184 Cal.Rptr.3d 394 (WL 960927) - Facts: This is an...more

Top franchise matters of 2014

by DLA Piper on

DLA Piper IPT partners Barry Heller, John Verhey and John Hughes recently conducted a webinar reviewing 2014’s top franchise decisions. Three significant 2014 matters are summarized below. 1. In Patterson v. Domino’s...more

Supreme Court of New Jersey Adopts Faragher/Ellerth Affirmative Defense

On February 11, 2015, the Supreme Court of New Jersey expressly adopted the test created by the United States Supreme Court in Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 807 (1998) and Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth,...more

N.J. Supreme Court Decision in Harassment Case Mixed Bag for Employers

by Ballard Spahr LLP on

The New Jersey Supreme Court recently decided two key issues affecting claims of supervisory hostile work environment sexual harassment under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“NJLAD”). In Aguas v. State of New...more

N.J. High Court Adopts Faragher-Ellerth Defense for LAD Sexual Harassment Claims

Last week, in Aguas v. New Jersey, No. A-35-13 (Feb. 11, 2015), New Jersey’s high court embraced the federal Faragher-Ellerth defense for claims alleging vicarious liability for supervisory sexual harassment under New...more

New Jersey high court decision will reshape employer liability in sexual harassment cases

by DLA Piper on

On February 11, 2015, the New Jersey Supreme Court issued a significant sexual harassment decision that offers something positive for both employers and employees. Employers will be happy that the Court has, after...more

Domino’s Delivers Key Ruling in Favor of Franchisors

The California Supreme Court recently issued an important victory for franchisors, finding that a franchisor does not stand in an employment or agency relationship with the franchisee and its employees for purposes of holding...more

Employment Flash - September 2014

In This Issue: - SEC Pays First Whistleblower Award to Audit and Compliance Professional - Supreme Court Allows Affordable Care Act Contraceptives Religious Exemption - EEOC Adopts New Pregnancy...more

California Supreme Court Overturns 2012 Domino's Decision

by Lewitt Hackman on

On August 28, 2014, the California Supreme Court reversed a 2012 Court of Appeal decision in Patterson v. Domino's Pizza, LLC. The lower court held that franchise operating systems, like Domino's, deprive franchisees of the...more

Did You Know…California Supreme Court Rules – No Franchisor Vicarious Liability

by Nossaman LLP on

The California Supreme Court recently held in Patterson v. Domino’s Pizza, LLC, No. S204543 (Cal. Aug. 28, 2014) that a franchisor could not be held vicariously liable under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act...more

California Employment Law Notes

by Proskauer Rose LLP on

Franchisor Is Not Liable For Franchisee's Alleged Sexual Harassment Of Its Employee - Patterson v. Domino's Pizza, LLC, 2014 WL 4236175 (Cal. S. Ct. 2014) - Taylor Patterson was hired by Sui Juris (a franchisee...more

Patterson v. Domino’s Pizza, LLC: Franchisors Are Not Vicariously Liable as “Employers” or “Principals” for Their Franchisees’...

by Perkins Coie on

In a significant win for franchisors, the California Supreme Court ruled 4-3 that although Domino’s “imposes comprehensive and meticulous standards for marketing its trademarked brand and operating its franchises in a uniform...more

Landmark Ruling: Franchisor Not Liable Absent Employment Related Control

by Faegre Baker Daniels on

On August 28, 2014, the California Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling in favor of Domino's Pizza and all business format franchisors that do business in California. In Patterson v. Domino's Pizza, LLC, ---P.3d---, 2014 WL...more

Walking in a Winter Litigation Wonderland: Top Employment Mistakes to Avoid at Your Company Holiday Party

by BakerHostetler on

As 2013 draws to a close, attentions turn to the festivities and merriment of the holiday season, and many employers gear up for office holiday parties. A holiday party is a great way to reward employees for a long year’s...more

Conducting Workplace Investigations

by Sands Anderson PC on

Recently, when advising a client who was investigating a complaint of sexual harassment, I had the opportunity to revisit the EEOC’s Enforcement Guidance: Vicarious Employer Liability for Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors...more

Are You My Supervisor?

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

Late last month, the Supreme Court considered whether and when a co-worker can be deemed a supervisor for purposes of evaluating if the employer is strictly liable for that person’s harassment of another employee....more

Who Is Really A Supervisor? Employer Liability For Hostile Work Environment Claims

by Akerman LLP - HR Defense on

The Supreme Court recently held oral arguments in the case Vance v. Ball State University, 646 F.3d 461 (7th Cir. 2011), which addresses the meaning of a "supervisor" in hostile work environment claims. If the Court applies...more

Who Is a “Supervisor” Under Title VII and Why You Should Care

Oral Argument in Vance v. Ball State University Takes an Unexpected Turn - Late last month the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Vance v. Ball State University, No. 11-556. The issue that Vance is expected to...more

22 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 1
Cybersecurity

"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 using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
Feedback? Tell us what you think of the new jdsupra.com!