Latest Posts › Employment Litigation

Share:

DC District Court Dismisses SOX Whistleblower Retaliation Claim Where Plaintiff Was Employed Abroad And His Employment Contract...

In Jefferson v. Science Apps. Int’l Corp., et al.,[1] the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed the plaintiff’s whistleblower retaliation claim brought under Section 806 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (“SOX”...more

Washington Federal Court Refuses to Dismiss SOX Whistleblower Claim Despite Plaintiff Working Abroad

On March 25, 2025, in Smith v. Coupang,[1] the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington denied Coupang, Inc.’s motion to dismiss its former employee’s SOX and state law whistleblower claims despite...more

U.S. Supreme Court Holds Majority-Group Plaintiffs Are Not Subject to a Heightened Evidentiary Standard Under Title VII

On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Jackson in Ames v. Ohio Dep’t of Youth Services, ruling that the “background circumstances” test—which applies a heighted...more

Georgia Federal Court Denies TRO and Motion to Dismiss in Trade Secrets Case

On March 27, 2025, in Stimlabs LLC v. Griffiths, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia ordered a former executive, Sarah Griffiths, to face claims related to her alleged theft of Stimlab’s trade secrets...more

Former Executive Secures $34.5 Million Settlement in Whistleblower Retaliation Case

On March 20, 2025, in Zornoza v. Terraform Global Inc. et al, No. 818-cv-02523 (D. Md. Apr. 4, 2025), a former executive of two SunEdison subsidiaries secured a $34.5 million settlement over his SOX whistleblower retaliation...more

U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument in Reverse Sex Discrimination Case

On February 26, 2025, the United States Supreme Court entertained oral argument in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, a case that centered on whether a plaintiff who is a member of a majority group must meet a higher...more

Seventh Circuit Decision Highlights Distinction Between Traditional Non-Compete and Forfeiture-for-Competition

A recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit allowed an employer to enforce a “forfeiture-for-competition” against a former plant manager. The Court explained that, under Delaware law, forfeiture-for...more

Texas Federal Court Stays Effective Date of Federal Trade Commission’s Non-Compete Rule But Declines to Issue Nationwide...

Earlier today, July 3, 2024, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas issued a preliminary injunction staying enforcement of the Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) proposed final rule (“Final Rule”)...more

Illinois Federal Court Grants Employer Summary Judgment on Several Types of Whistleblower Retaliation Claims

On May 5, 2023, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois granted a defendant-employer’s motion for summary judgment on whistleblower retaliation claims, holding that the company demonstrated that it would...more

District of NJ: Federal Courts Lack Jurisdiction to Enforce Preliminary Reinstatement Orders Under SOX

On April 19, 2023, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey granted the defendant-employer’s motion to dismiss a complaint seeking court enforcement of a preliminary reinstatement order after determining that...more

7th Circuit: Actual Denial of Leave Not Necessary for FMLA Interference Claim

On June 1, 2022, the Seventh Circuit reversed the entry of summary judgment on a Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) claim, holding that an actual denial of an employee’s FMLA leave request is not necessary to constitute an...more

CA Appellate Court Addresses “Willfulness” Standard Under FCRA

On April 19, 2022, a California Appeals Court reversed and remanded a trial court’s grant of summary judgment in an employer’s favor, concluding there was a triable issue of material fact regarding whether a defendant had...more

7th Cir. Affirms Summary Judgment On Illinois Whistleblower Act and Illinois Jury Act Retaliation Claims

On April 14, 2022, the Seventh Circuit affirmed the entry of summary judgment on claims under the Illinois Whistleblower Act and Illinois Jury Act, concluding that the plaintiff was not terminated for engaging in protected...more

Supreme Court Rules That BIPA Claims Are Not Barred By Ill. Workers’ Compensation Act

On February 3, 2022, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that the exclusivity provisions of the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act (“IWCA”) do not bar a claim for statutory damages under the Illinois Biometric Information...more

7th Circuit Reverses Denial of Class Certification for Disparate Impact Subclasses

On January 6, 2022, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois erred in denying class certification to putative subclasses of unsuccessful Black job applicants...more

Illinois Appellate Court Addresses Statute of Limitations Period for BIPA Claims

On September 17, 2021, an Illinois Appellate Court addressed the appropriate statute of limitations period for claims brought pursuant to the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA” or the “Act”), 740 ILCS §...more

Chicago Federal Court Rejects Retaliatory Discharge Claim Due To Existence Of SOX Whistleblower Claim

On April 23, 2018, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois ruled that a plaintiff’s SOX claim precluded his claim for common law retaliatory discharge. Cohen v. Power Solutions International, Inc., No....more

18 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide