Eighth Circuit Reverses Dismissal of Putative Class Claims
DE Under 3: Reversal of 2019 Enterprise Rent-a-Car Trial Decision; EEOC Commissioner Nominee Update; Overtime Listening Session
Revisiting McGirt: New Legal Developments Challenge Oklahoma’s Landmark Ruling
Court of Appeals Reversals from a Criminal Perspective | Jim Huggler | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
The Immediate and Lasting Impacts of McGirt: A Novel Ruling for Oklahoma
The Dangers of Untimely Filings – What Employers Need to Know
Nota Bene Episode 98: The U.S. Supreme Court’s Mark on U.S. Antitrust Law for 2020 with Thomas Dillickrath and Bevin Newman
#BigIdeas2020: NLRB’s Actions Impact Employers in 2020 - Employment Law This Week® - Trending News
Jones Day Talks: Women in IP: The Supreme Court's "Copyright Day"
Podcast: South Dakota v. Wayfair
E17: Carpenter Decision Builds Up Privacy from #SCOTUS
I-16 – Kneeling, Indefinite Leave, DC Updates, Non-Compete Consideration, and Pretty as a Protected Class
On November 3, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued an update to its Medicare Part B drug payment policy for hospitals participating in the 340B drug pricing program and reversed payment cuts in place...more
The US Department of Justice recently intervened in an qui tam alleging false and fraudulent claims involving the acquisition of physician practice locations by a health system and subsequent management of the health system’s...more
In Maine Community, the US Supreme Court found on April 27, 2020, that the Risk Corridors program created by Congress was a “money-mandating obligation” requiring the federal government to make payments under Section 1342 of...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has determined that the federal government must pay over $12 billion to certain health insurers that participated in health insurance exchanges in the first three years that those exchanges were in...more
Despite Congress’ efforts to use riders to neutralize a provision of the Affordable Care Act (ACA or Act), the Federal government (Government) owes certain insurers $12 billion....more
On April 27, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the federal government is on the hook for $12 billion it failed to pay insurers under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) risk-mitigation program known as the Risk Corridors Program. ...more
The Supreme Court issued a long-awaited ruling on April 27, 2020, directed at a more than $12 billion challenge related to the temporary risk corridors program established by the Affordable Care Act (the “ACA”). Challenges...more
On April 27, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Moda Health Plan, Inc. v. United States, holding that the Affordable Care Act requires the federal government to compensate insurers for significant losses their health plans...more
On April 27, 2020, the US Supreme Court ruled by an 8-1 decision that the federal government must pay billions of dollars to health insurers who sold consumer policies on exchanges under the Affordable Care Act’s (“ACA”)...more
In a major win for health insurers, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in an 8-1 decision that the federal government owes roughly $12.3 billion to health insurers who claimed losses under the risk corridor program of the...more
ZB, N.A. v. Super Ct. of San Diego Cty., 8 Cal. 5th 175, 252 Cal. Rptr. 3d 228 (2019) - Summary: Employee may not recover unpaid wages under Labor Code section 558 through PAGA. Facts: Plaintiff Lawson worked for...more
This month's key California employment law cases involve payment of wages, workplace conditions, public employment issues, and civil procedure....more
California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) allows aggrieved employees to recover civil penalties on behalf of themselves, other employees, and the State of California for Labor Code violations. On July 13, 2017, the...more
Supreme Court Advance Release Opinions: SC19516 - Doe v. Boy Scouts of America Corp. SC19516 Concurrence - Doe v. Boy Scouts of America Corp. SC19516 Concurrence - Doe v. Boy Scouts of America Corp. ...more
On August 10, 2015, the California Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision that could have broad implications regarding an insurer’s right to seek reimbursement of unreasonable fees and costs directly from so-called Cumis...more