News & Analysis as of

Title VII › Attorney's Fees

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act is a United States federal law enacted in 1964 and aimed at preventing discrimination in the workplace on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, and religion. Title VII... more +
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act is a United States federal law enacted in 1964 and aimed at preventing discrimination in the workplace on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, and religion. Title VII has been subsequently extended to discrimination on the basis of pregnancy and sexual stereotypes and to prohibit sexual harassment. Title VII applies to all employers with fifteen or more employees including private employers, state and local governments, and educational institutions.  less -
Butler Snow LLP

Step-dad’s “slobbery” kiss leads to big trouble for Tennessee employer

Butler Snow LLP on

Under Title VII, an employer can be held liable for retaliation by a non-supervisory co-worker if (1) the conduct is sufficiently severe to dissuade a complaint of discrimination; (2) management was aware of the behavior; and...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Religious Institutions Update: October 2021

Holland & Knight LLP on

Morals Clause Ruled Not Within Title VII Religious Exemptions Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it unlawful "to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Petition For Additional Attorneys’ Fees Denied By D.C. Court In Largest Employment Discrimination Class Action Settlement In U.S....

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: In a recent ruling out of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the Court assessed a petition for attorney’s fees filed in conjunction with the settlement of a 43-year old sex discrimination...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Left Coast Appeals

This Week at The Ninth: Employees, Independent Contractors, and ERISA

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Left Coast Appeals on

This week, this Ninth Circuit once again issued a number of opinions arising from the employment relationship. Here, we focus on two of particular interest. In the first, the Court sought to unravel whether an emergency room...more

Rivkin Radler LLP

The Employment Law Reporter- July 9, 2020

Rivkin Radler LLP on

Welcome to the Summer 2020 issue of The Employment Law Reporter. This inaugural issue of this quarterly newsletter first reviews the landmark U.S. Supreme Court opinion in which the Court ruled that an employer that fires an...more

Lathrop GPM

The Franchise Memorandum - Issue 250

Lathrop GPM on

Ohio Federal Court Awards Damages to Matco for Breach of Contract, Trademark Infringement, and Misappropriation of Trade Secrets - A federal court in Ohio has granted a franchisor’s unopposed motion for summary judgment...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

End of the Road: Eighth Circuit Upholds $3.3 Million Fee Award Against The EEOC For Frivolous Claims

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: After over a decade of litigation between the EEOC and trucking company CRST Van Expedited, the Eighth Circuit recently affirmed a federal district court’s order requiring the EEOC to pay $3.3 million in...more

Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates & Woodyard,...

Business Recovers Millions in Fees, Expenses, and Costs After Claims by EEOC Found to be "Frivolous"

Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates & Woodyard,... on

A district court awarded nearly $4.7 million in fees, expenses, and costs to a trucking business after the court found Title VII claims brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) to be “frivolous,...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

Substantial Changes Coming to New York Employment Discrimination Laws

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,... on

On the last day of the 2019–2020 legislative session, the New York State Senate and Assembly passed an omnibus bill. This legislation, once effective, will overhaul New York’s anti-discrimination laws and uproot precedent...more

Fisher Phillips

7-Year Equal Pay Class and Collective Action in NJ Could Settle for $6.2 Million

Fisher Phillips on

More than seven years ago, female sales representatives who worked for Merck filed a class and collective action alleging discrimination in pay on the basis of their gender in violation of the Equal Pay Act (EPA) and Title...more

Proskauer Rose LLP

Three Point Shot - March 2018

Proskauer Rose LLP on

Can a High School Football Coach Say a Hail Mary after a Hail Mary? High school football coach Joseph Kennedy was not instructing his quarterback to take a knee in victory formation to run down the clock. Instead, in an...more

Fisher Phillips

Chadbourne Litigation Settles, Leaving Unanswered Questions About Equal Pay Claims

Fisher Phillips on

The parties to a high-profile Equal Pay Act lawsuit have reached a multi-million dollar settlement that will be sure to capture the attention of employers across the country. Former partners of the law firm Chadbourne & Parke...more

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace

Massachusetts Legislature Considers Prohibiting Mandatory Arbitration of Employment Claims

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace on

A bill prohibiting mandatory arbitration of employment-related claims, introduced in late 2017 before the Massachusetts House of Representatives, continues to gain traction in early 2018. The bill (House Bill 4058), which...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Employment Law - February 2018

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP on

Supreme Court Hits Pause on State Statutes of Limitation - Why it matters - Weighing in on the definition of “tolled,” the Supreme Court declared the time limit on state claims stops while federal claims are pending....more

Payne & Fears

Key California Employment Law Cases: December 2017

Payne & Fears on

Lopez v. Routt, 17 Cal. App. 5th 1006, 225 Cal. Rptr. 3d 851 (2017) - Facts: Plaintiff sued her employer and supervisor for harassment in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”). The matter...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

Los Angeles Jury Awards $17.4 Million to Sanitation Bureau Employee

Proskauer - California Employment Law on

Continuing an alarming recent pattern of multi-million dollar jury awards, a Los Angeles jury panel recently awarded $17.4 million to a former employee of the Bureau of Sanitation. The employee claimed he had been retaliated...more

Mintz - Employment Viewpoints

#MeToo Settlements and the Tax Code Overhaul: No More Tax Incentive to Hush Victims

Mintz - Employment Viewpoints on

Taking note of the #MeToo movement, Congress included a new provision in the tax code overhaul bill — Section 13307 – which is titled “Denial of Deduction for Settlements Subject to Nondisclosure Agreements Paid in Connection...more

Fisher Phillips

Web Exclusive: EEOC Trial Tactics Lead To Massive Sanctions Award

Fisher Phillips on

After more than ten years of protracted litigation brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), including a stop at the U.S. Supreme Court, an Iowa federal district court recently upheld an award of nearly...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

EEOC Ordered To Pay $1.9 Million For Frivolous Claims Against Trucking Company

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

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

Proskauer - California Employment Law

California Employment Law Notes - September 2016

Proskauer - California Employment Law on

Ninth Circuit Strikes Down Employer's Class Action Waiver - Morris v. Ernst & Young, LLP, 2016 WL 4433080 (9th Cir. 2016) - As a condition of employment, Stephen Morris and Kelly McDaniel were required to sign...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

California Employment Law Notes - July 2016

Proskauer - California Employment Law on

Employer Is Entitled To Recover $4 Million In Attorney's Fees From EEOC - CRST Van Expedited, Inc. v. EEOC, 578 U.S. ___, 136 S. Ct. 1642 (2016) - The EEOC filed suit against CRST (a trucking company) alleging...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Supreme Court Allows Employer to Collect Fees From the EEOC Without Verdict on Merits of Claim

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on

Title VII allows federal courts to award attorneys’ fees to the prevailing party in discrimination suits. While plaintiffs typically receive their fees if they win a discrimination or retaliation claim, defendants can also...more

Franczek P.C.

Supreme Court Tells EEOC It May Be on the Hook for Fees if It Does Not Fulfill Its Statutory Pre-Suit Duties

Franczek P.C. on

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) authorizes the award of attorneys’ fees to a party who prevails in a discrimination or retaliation claim brought under that statute. Although this fee shifting provision...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

Fee Wars: Supreme Court Eases Defendants’ Burden for Attorneys’ Fees in Baseless Discrimination Actions

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

In an 8-0 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that attorneys’ fees for successfully defending a Title VII action can be recovered by an employer even if the defendant’s victory is not based on the merits of the case....more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Rejects The Government’s Position In The Largest EEOC Fee Sanction Case Ever

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: In a landmark case for EEOC litigation involving fee sanctions, while employer CRST successfully argued that a ruling “on-the-merits” is not necessary to be a prevailing party, the SCOTUS remanded the case...more

49 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2
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