Seyfarth Synopsis: On March 28, 2022, the EEOC released its fiscal year 2023 budget justification (see here) and fiscal year 2021 performance report (“APR”) (see here). The APR is a “report card” analysis of the EEOC’s...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In EEOC v. Sherwood Food Distributors, Inc., No. 16-CV-2386, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32921 (N.D. Ohio Feb. 24, 2022), a federal court in Ohio held an employer in contempt for failing to pay its payroll tax...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Illinois Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in McDonald v. Symphony Bronzeville Park, LLC, et al., 2022 IL 126511 (Feb. 3, 2022), holding that claims for statutory damages against an...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: This week the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued its long-awaited decision in Cothron v. White Castle Sys., No. 20-3202, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 37593 (7th Cir. Dec. 20, 2021), on whether...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: While businesses have shifted their operations to digital platforms over the last few decades, the COVID-19 pandemic has greatly accelerated the transformation of the workplace. One area where employers...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: On September 17, 2021, the Illinois Appellate Court issued its highly-anticipated decision in Tims v. Black Horse Carriers, Inc., 2021 IL App (1st) 200563 (1st Dist. Sept. 17, 2021), on whether a one-year...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Following a jury trial in a federal court in Mississippi in an EEOC-initiated lawsuit alleging that Black adult club dancers were subjected to race discrimination, where their employer was found liable of...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In EEOC v. Konos, Inc., Case No. 1:20-CV-973 (W.D. Mich. June 3, 2021), the EEOC filed a lawsuit on behalf of a claimant against her employer, alleging it subjected to her to a hostile work environment and...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In EEOC v. Schuster Co., No. 13-CV-4063, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79815 (N.D. Iowa Apr. 13, 2021), the EEOC alleged that Defendant’s use of a strength test had disparate impact on female job applicants for...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In Handloser v. HCL Technologies LTD, No. 19-CV-1242, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45183 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 9, 2021), Plaintiffs alleged that an Indian-based company with its U.S. headquarters in California gave...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In EEOC v. JBS USA, LLC, No. 10-CV-2103, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13012 (D. Colo. Jan. 25, 2021), an EEOC-initiated lawsuit alleging a meatpacking engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination on the...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In a recent ruling out of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, the Court denied approval of a consent decree agreed upon by the EEOC and a defendant, taking issue with the decree’s...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Illinois Supreme Court recently affirmed a state appellate court’s holding that in class action lawsuits, an effective tender made before a named plaintiff files a class certification motion satisfies...more
2/28/2020
/ Attorney's Fees ,
Class Action ,
Class Certification ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Damages ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ,
IL Supreme Court ,
Mootness ,
Real Estate Market ,
Rental Property ,
Statutory Violations ,
Tender Rules
Seyfarth Synopsis: Over the last few years, Illinois companies have quickly become aware of the risks associated with the state’s unique biometric privacy law. Originally passed in 2008, the Illinois Biometric Information...more
7/2/2019
/ Biometric Information ,
Biometric Information Privacy Act ,
Class Action ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Data Collection ,
Data Privacy ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Facial Recognition Technology ,
Fingerprints ,
Personal Data ,
Personally Identifiable Information ,
Popular
Seyfarth Synopsis: A federal district court in Arkansas recently denied an employer’s motion for summary judgment on two EEOC-initiated ADA claims – in EEOC v. Crain Automotive Holdings LLC, No. 4:17-CV-627, 2019 U.S. Dist....more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Although the Illinois Supreme Court’s recent decision in Rosenbach v. Six Flags may have upped the ante for employers facing litigation under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”)...more
3/29/2019
/ Biometric Information ,
Biometric Information Privacy Act ,
Class Action ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Data Collection ,
Data Privacy ,
Facial Recognition Technology ,
Fingerprints ,
Legislative Agendas ,
Personal Data ,
Personally Identifiable Information ,
Private Right of Action ,
Proposed Legislation
Seyfarth Synopsis: A federal district court in Kansas recently granted the EEOC’s motion for judgment on the pleadings in an ADA lawsuit brought against UPS and an employee union...more
8/10/2018
/ Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) ,
Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA) ,
Compensation & Benefits ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Delivery Drivers ,
Disability Discrimination ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Employment Policies ,
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) ,
Judgment on the Pleadings ,
Medical Evaluation Reports ,
Reasonable Accommodation ,
Unions ,
UPS ,
Wage and Hour
Seyfarth Synopsis: In a lawsuit brought by a plaintiff class action firm alleging that objectors to class action settlements violated both RICO and Illinois state law by filing frivolous objections in order to seek payouts,...more
8/6/2018
/ Abuse of Process ,
Class Action ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Dismissals ,
Diversity Jurisdiction ,
FRCP 23 ,
Injunctive Relief ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Objections ,
Putative Class Actions ,
Racketeering ,
Reversal ,
RICO ,
Settlement ,
State Law Claims ,
Subject Matter Jurisdiction ,
Supplemental Jurisdiction ,
Unauthorized Practice of Law
A federal district court in Maryland recently denied in part an employer’s motion to dismiss a race discrimination action brought on behalf of African-born security guards by the EEOC, and instead granted the EEOC’s motion to...more
5/24/2018
/ Civil Rights Act ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Disparate Treatment ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) ,
Hostile Environment ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
National Origin Discrimination ,
Race Discrimination ,
Title VII
Seyfarth Synopsis: In an Equal Pay Act collective action lawsuit brought by female school crossing guards against the City of New York, who alleged they were paid less than male traffic enforcement agents, a federal district...more
5/7/2018
/ Class Action ,
Collective Actions ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Equal Pay ,
Equal Pay Act ,
Gender-Based Pay Discrimination ,
Labor Law Violations ,
NYCHRL ,
NYSHRL ,
State Labor Laws ,
Wage and Hour
Seyfarth Synopsis: In a showdown between the State of Texas and the EEOC – whereby Texas alleged that the EEOC’s “Enforcement Guidance on the Consideration of Arrest and Conviction Records in Employment Decisions Under Title...more
2/28/2018
/ Adjudicatory Process ,
Ban the Box ,
Conditional Job Offers ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Criminal Background Checks ,
Declaratory Judgments ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Discrimination ,
Employment Litigation ,
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) ,
Felons ,
Hiring & Firing ,
Job Applicants ,
Motion To Enjoin ,
Ripeness ,
State and Local Government ,
Summary Judgment
Seyfarth Synopsis: In a class action lawsuit alleging that Tinder discriminated on the basis of age in violation of California state laws by charging consumers age 30 and over a higher price for Tinder Plus subscriptions, the...more
2/5/2018
/ Age Discrimination ,
Class Certification ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Dating Services ,
Failure To State A Claim ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Popular ,
Putative Class Actions ,
Social Media ,
State and Local Government ,
Subscription Services ,
Tinder ,
Unfair Competition Law (UCL) ,
Unruh Civil Rights Act
Seyfarth Synopsis: In a nationwide consumer fraud class action involving false labeling claims under various state laws, a federal district court in Illinois granted the company’s motion to dismiss claims relative to a...more
1/24/2018
/ Bristol-Myers Squibb Co v Superior Court of California - San Francisco County ,
Class Action ,
Consumer Fraud ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Damages ,
Dietary Supplements ,
Employment Litigation ,
False Advertising ,
Injunctive Relief ,
Jurisdiction ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Non-Residents ,
Pharmaceutical Industry ,
Product Labels
Seyfarth Synopsis: In the latest chapter of the ongoing legal battle between the EEOC and delivery company CRST Van Expedited regarding the agency’s sexual harassment claims, a federal district court ordered the EEOC to pay...more
9/28/2017
/ Appeals ,
Attorney's Fees ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Delivery Drivers ,
Determination on Remand ,
EEOC v CRST Van Expedited ,
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) ,
Frivolous Lawsuits ,
Prevailing Party ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Sexual Harassment ,
Title VII ,
Trucking Industry
Seyfarth Synopsis: After a federal district court dismissed the EEOC’s unlawful-interference claim against a private college that had sued a former employee for allegedly breaching a settlement agreement by filing an EEOC...more
9/20/2017
/ Breach of Contract ,
Colleges ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Defense Strategies ,
Employee Rights ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) ,
Interference Claims ,
Mootness ,
Retaliation ,
Settlement Agreements