News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Burden of Proof › Appeals

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Foley & Lardner LLP

Supreme Court’s E.M.D. Sales v. Carrera Decision: A Victory for Employers Navigating FLSA Exemptions

Foley & Lardner LLP on

A January 15, 2025, U.S. Supreme Court opinion brought welcome news for employers defending claims of worker exempt status misclassification under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). In the case at issue, E.M.D. Sales, Inc....more

Maynard Nexsen

Burden at the Crossroads: Pizarro Paves the Way for Potential Supreme Court Review

Maynard Nexsen on

ERISA breach of fiduciary duty class actions have surged in recent years, prompting courts to grapple with complex questions about how these claims should be pleaded and litigated. Among the most consequential and unresolved...more

Rumberger | Kirk

No Extra Hurdles for Employers Claiming Overtime Exemptions: High Court Rules FLSA Does Not Require Stricter Evidence Standards

Rumberger | Kirk on

In a unanimous opinion decided January 15, 2025, E.M.D. Sales, Inc., v. Carrerra et al., the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the less stringent preponderance of evidence standard, instead of the clear and convincing evidence...more

Ice Miller

Employers Take Note: The “Background Circumstances” Rule in Reverse Discrimination Cases May Soon be a Thing of the Past

Ice Miller on

On February 26, 2025, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, which is a case that will determine whether a plaintiff bringing a so-called reverse discrimination claim (where, for...more

Benesch

Supreme Court Appears Poised to Do Away With Additional Burdens on Reverse-Discrimination Plaintiffs

Benesch on

On February 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Ames v. OH Dept. of Youth Services, which questioned whether the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals correctly decided that a heterosexual plaintiff should have...more

Butler Snow LLP

SCOTUS Confirms Lower Standard of Proof for Employers Claiming FLSA Exemptions

Butler Snow LLP on

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

Perkins Coie

The US Supreme Court Addresses the Standard of Proof for Exemptions Under the FLSA

Perkins Coie on

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

Jackson Walker

Supreme Court Lowers Burden of Proof for FLSA Overtime Exemptions

Jackson Walker on

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

Cole Schotz

U.S. Supreme Court Issues Key Decision on FLSA Burden of Proof

Cole Schotz on

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

Vedder Price

Supreme Court Clarifies Burden of Proof Standard for FLSA Claims

Vedder Price on

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

FordHarrison

SCOTUS Resolves Circuit Dispute on FLSA Evidence Standards, Clarifying Lower Evidentiary Burden for Employers

FordHarrison on

Real World Impact:  In a unanimous decision issued on January 15, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the “preponderance of evidence” standard applies to employers seeking to prove an employee exemption...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

U.S. Supreme Court Makes Clear There Is No Heightened Standard for Employers to Establish an FLSA Exemption Applies

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

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

Foley & Lardner LLP

Supreme Court Set to Determine Burden of Proof on Fair Labor Standards Act Exemptions

Foley & Lardner LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court has set oral argument for November 5, 2024, in E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera. The issue before the court is what standard of proof employers must satisfy to demonstrate that a Fair Labor Standards...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. on

[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more

International Lawyers Network

Supreme Court Unanimously Rules That Willfulness Is Not Required to Recover Profits

International Lawyers Network on

The U.S. Supreme Court resolved a circuit split on April 23, 2020, by unanimously holding in Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil Group, Inc., et al. that a brand owner is not required to prove that a trademark infringer acted...more

Hinshaw & Culbertson - Consumer Financial...

Consumer Law Hinsights – July 2020

Hinshaw & Culbertson - Consumer Financial... on

Welcome to Consumer Law Hinsights?a monthly compilation of nationwide consumer protection cases of interest to financial services and accounts receivable management companies. This edition highlights our interactive COVID-19...more

Sunstein LLP

Trademark Infringement Remedies Just Got Snappier? United States Supreme Court Says Proving Willfulness Is Not Required For...

Sunstein LLP on

In U.S. trademark litigation, the focus is typically on injunctive relief: The plaintiff wants the defendant to cease use of the infringing mark before the plaintiff’s reputation is harmed or the strength of the mark is...more

Greenberg Glusker LLP

Supreme Court Unanimously Holds that Willfulness is Not a Prerequisite for an Award Disgorging Trademark Infringer’s Profits

Greenberg Glusker LLP on

On April 23, 2020, the United States Supreme Court unanimously held that the Lanham Act does not require a showing of willful infringement to justify an award of defendant’s profits to the plaintiff. Romag Fasteners, Inc. v....more

Lowenstein Sandler LLP

Romag Fasteners: SCOTUS Holds That Plaintiffs in Trademark Suits Need Not Show "Willful Intent" of Infringement to Recover Damages...

Lowenstein Sandler LLP on

In a recent unanimous decision in Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court brought some welcome clarity to the question of whether willfulness is required in order to recover an infringer’s profits under...more

WilmerHale

Supreme Court Holds that Willfulness is Not a Requirement to an Award of an Infringer’s Profits

WilmerHale on

On April 23, the US Supreme Court resolved a six-six circuit split over whether a defendant must have willfully infringed a trademark for a plaintiff to obtain as a remedy the infringer’s profits. In Romag Fasteners, Inc. v....more

Smart & Biggar

Whether or not there’s a will, there’s still a way to infringers’ profits in Canadian trademark litigation

Smart & Biggar on

Late last month, in a landmark decision heralded by brand owners, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Romag Fasteners, Inc v Fossil Group, Inc that a plaintiff in a trademark infringement suit is not required to show that a...more

Miles & Stockbridge P.C.

Willfulness no Longer Required for Trademark Owners to be Awarded an Infringer’s Profits

Miles & Stockbridge P.C. on

In a decision some believe may generate more trademark infringement litigation, the U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that a trademark owner does not have to prove a defendant acted willfully to receive a profits remedy in...more

Baker Donelson

Supreme Court Clears an Obstacle to Profit Awards for Trademark Owners, But Doesn't Completely Flush "Willfulness"

Baker Donelson on

On April 23, 2020, the United States Supreme Court's unanimous decision in Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc., 590 U.S. ___ (2020), resolved a circuit court split by confirming that a plaintiff in a trademark infringement...more

White & Case LLP

Supreme Court clarifies rules for remedies in trademark litigation

White & Case LLP on

White & Case Technology Newsflash - Willful infringement is no longer required for trademark owners to recover infringers' profits. In Romag Fasteners v. Fossil Group, the Supreme Court resolved a longstanding circuit...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

MarkIt to Market® - April 2020: Two Takeaways from Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc.

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. on

On April 23, 2020, Justice Neil Gorsuch delivered a unanimous opinion in Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc., clarifying that a Lanham Act provision does not require a plaintiff to prove that acts of infringement are...more

92 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 4
Next »

"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