Proof in Trial: University of Louisville
2021 Bid Protest Decisions with Far-Reaching Impacts for Government Contractors
#WorkforceWednesday: CA Whistleblower Retaliation Cases, NYC Pay Transparency Law, Biden’s Labor Agenda - Employment Law This Week®
Secondary Considerations of Non-Obviousness - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
The Risk of Personal Injury Claims from COVID-19 and What to Do About It
Navigating the New Normal: Risk Management and Legal Considerations for Real Estate Companies
VIDEO: Will Pending Federal Covid-19 Legislation Preempt Longstanding State Laws Regarding the Burden of Proof in Workers’ Compensation Claims?
Podcast: IP Life Sciences Landscape: Aiding Orange and Purple Book Patent Owners in Developing PTAB Survival Skills
II-31- The Changing 9 to 5 From 1980 to Today
Last month the United States Supreme Court (“SCOTUS”) delivered a pro-employer ruling on the standard of proof required under certain provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). In E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera, the...more
In Osborn v. JAB Management Services, Inc., No. 24-1573 (January 22, 2025), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed a district court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of an employer on a former...more
The Supreme Court of the United States rejected a higher standard of proof for employers to demonstrate that an employee is exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), providing clarity for FLSA disputes across the...more
On January 15, 2025, the Supreme Court for the United States issued an opinion interpreting the standard of proof employers must meet to establish the applicability of an exemption to the overtime requirements of the Fair...more
On January 15, 2025, the United States Supreme Court ruled in E.M.D. Sales, Inc., et al. v. Carrera et al., that the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (the “FLSA”) exemptions do not require a heightened burden of proof. The decision...more
Last week, in a highly anticipated ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in EMD Sales Inc. v. Carrera, Case No. 23-217, concluding that a preponderance-of-the-evidence standard applies when an employer seeks to...more
Employers do not have to meet a heightened standard of proof to establish that an employee is exempt from the minimum wage and overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the U.S. Supreme Court held...more
An appeals court just ruled that pizza companies do not need to use the Internal Revenue Service’s standard mileage rate when reimbursing their delivery drivers for the actual costs of using their vehicles for work. In...more
On September 2, 2020, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that employees bear the burden of proof on whether bonuses should have been included in the regular rate of pay for purposes of calculating overtime...more
In April 2018, the Ninth Circuit held that employers cannot consider pre-employment salary history, even in combination with other factors, to justify gender pay disparities. See Rizo v. Yovino, 887 F.3d 453 (9th Cir. 2018)...more
This month's key California employment law cases involve disability discrimination, wage and hour, and arbitration agreements enforcement. Doe v. Dept. of Corrections & Rehabilitation, No. E071224, 2019 WL 6907515 (Cal....more
The California Court of Appeal has affirmed a complete victory by Safeway Inc. over a certified class of wage-and-hour plaintiffs. Esparza v. Safeway Inc., et al., B287927 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC369766, June 10,...more
This month’s key California employment law cases involve wage and hour issues. Donohue v. AMN Servs., 29 Cal. App. 5th 1068, 241 Cal. Rptr. 3d 111 (2018) - Summary: Policy rounding employees’ time worked is legal if...more
In 2-1 decision by a three-judge panel, the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals (whose rulings apply to all South Carolina employers) reversed a decision to grant summary judgment—meaning the trial court had found there was no...more
This month’s key California employment law cases involve wage and hour and discrimination issues. Wage & Hour - Batze v. Safeway, Inc., 10 Cal. App. 5th 440, 216 Cal. Rptr. 3d 390 (2017) - Summary: While determination of...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In Lubin v. Wackenhut Corp., the California Court of Appeal reinstated an effort to certify a class of over 10,000 security officers required to sign on-duty meal period agreements. The Court of Appeal...more