Protect Yourself and Your Business with Indemnification Understanding
Herb Stapleton's FBI Experience Proves to be Asset to Dinsmore's Corporate Team
Former FBI Executive and Cybersecurity Leader Herbert Stapleton Joins Dinsmore’s National Corporate Practice
No Password Required: Former Lead Attorney at U.S. Cyber Command, Cyber Law Strategist, and Appreciator of ‘Mad Men’ Hats
A Counterintuitive Approach to Winning Without Litigation: One-on-One with Haley Morrison
Lawyers Beware: There Could Be Serious Ethics Issues With The New AI Browsers
LathamTECH in Focus: Tech Deals: The Emerging Focus of FDI Regulators?
Fox on Podcasting: Harnessing the Power of Niche
Navigating Employee Integration in Mergers and Acquisitions: Lessons From Pretty Woman — Hiring to Firing Podcast
FCPA Compliance Report: Stay the Course: Ellen Lafferty on Navigating Anti-Corruption Compliance in 2025
Multijurisdictional Employers, P2: 2025 State-by-State Updates on Non-Compete/Non-Solicitation Agts
6 Takeaways | From Tension to Teamwork: Real Strategies for Legal Collaboration
Hsu Untied interview with David Cohen, General Counsel at Infinite Athlete
Hsu Untied interview with Brad Waugh, General Counsel at TP-Link
Compliance Tip of the Day – New FCPA Enforcement Memo – What Does it Mean?
Hsu Untied interview with D'Lonra Ellis, CLO of Oakland A's
Your Guide to Dealing with Subpoenas Effectively
Episode 371 -- DOJ's New Corporate Enforcement Program
Shout Outs and Rants: Episode 153, The CW 25 Edition
Regulatory Ramblings: Episode 68 - Why Geopolitical Risk Matters to Compliance and Legal Staff with Mark Nuttal and Chad Olsen
Two years ago, the long dormant duty to accommodate employees’ religious beliefs and practices was awakened by the U.S. Supreme Court in Groff v. Dejoy. Gone were the days when an employer could justify the denial of a...more
On June 20, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued an important ruling in Stanley v. City of Sanford, Florida, which significantly narrows the scope of the protections under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities...more
On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, resolving a long-standing split among federal courts and clarifying the evidentiary standard for Title...more
The past few decades have seen a Supreme Court receptive to claims brought on the basis of freedom of religion. For example, in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (June 2014), the Supreme Court ruled that the Affordable Care...more
In a decision poised to change the landscape of Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) litigation, on April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court held in Cunningham et al. v. Cornell University et al. that a claimant...more
On April 2, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a truck driver who lost his job after testing positive for marijuana may pursue claims for lost wages under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt...more
On March 24, 2025, the Supreme Court declined to review a Ninth Circuit decision that provided an opportunity to clarify how its landmark decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, 144 S. Ct. 2244 (2024) affects the...more
A new Supreme Court decision just made it easier for employees to revive lawsuits they voluntarily dismissed – in some cases, even after the statute of limitations has expired. In Waetzig v. Halliburton Energy Services, the...more
On February 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, a case that challenges the heightened evidentiary burden imposed on majority-group plaintiffs in Title VII...more
A few months ago, we published an alert noting that the U.S. Supreme Court had agreed to hear Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services. The case addresses whether plaintiffs alleging reverse discrimination under Title VII...more
On January 15, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States held that employers need only demonstrate that an employee is exempt from the minimum wage and overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) by a...more
Tobacco surcharges have become the focus of class action litigation in recent months. Although corporate wellness programs are commonplace, employers that impose a tobacco surcharge (or other premium discount) in connection...more
The Supreme Court will begin a new term on October 7, and we’re watching several cases that will likely have a big impact on the workplace. The Justices will grapple with wage and hour issues, coverage under the Americans...more
In Ryan LLC v. Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC’s) final noncompete rule was held to be “unlawful and set aside” by Judge Ada Brown of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas....more
The Supreme Court just sided with Starbucks in a case where the Labor Board tried to force the company to temporarily reinstate workers who were fired for hosting media interviews afterhours in a closed store. Starbucks said...more
Executive Summary: On May 16, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Smith v. Spizzirri, holding that federal district courts have no discretion under Section 3 of the Federal Arbitration Act (“the FAA”) to dismiss a case once...more
If an employer or coworker persistently uses a transgender worker’s wrong name or identified pronoun, can that constitute a hostile work environment in violation of Title VII? In Copeland v. Georgia Department of Corrections,...more
To prevail on a discrimination claim under Title VII and similar anti-discrimination laws, the employee bringing suit must prove that he or she suffered an “adverse employment action” because of a legally protected...more
The Supreme Court may soon clarify whether an employer’s decision to transfer an employee to a lateral job – with no change in pay or benefits – violates federal civil rights law if it’s done for discriminatory reasons....more
On December 6, 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) heard arguments in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri—a potentially pivotal case concerning whether Title VII requires plaintiffs to establish a...more
When I reflect on the relationship that our firm has with our clients, I’m most proud of the fact that you can always count on us. That often means defending complex litigation, steering you through regulatory threats,...more
The Supreme Court just began a new term, and we’re watching several cases that will likely have a big impact on the workplace. Specifically, the Court will weigh in on whether someone can “test” violations of federal...more
The Supreme Court’s blockbuster decisions last term dominated the headlines – and many rulings will have a lasting impact on employer practices. The Justices continued to shape the workplace law landscape by ruling on an...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: On June 25, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its pivotal ruling in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez (“TransUnion”). As reported here...more
Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark opinion in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, 137 S. Ct. 1773 (2017), a question arising under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) collective actions is...more