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
A federal judge in Texas just ruled that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) exceeded its authority by issuing enforcement guidance requiring bathroom, dress, and pronoun accommodations. In Thursday’s order...more
This week (specifically June 15, 2021) marked the one-year anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision in the case of Bostock v. Clayton County, which outlawed sexual orientation or transgender status employment...more
Supreme Court decisions are often the most challenging pieces of legal guidance to understand. They are rarely straightforward and usually contain so much analysis that it becomes hard to get to the bottom of what was...more
On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, holding that, pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, covered employers may not...more
On Monday, June 15, 2020, the US Supreme Court held in Bostock v. Clayton County that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects transgender, gay and lesbian employees (and prospective employees) from workplace...more
On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964’s prohibition of sex discrimination encompasses discrimination against gay and transgender individuals. Justice Neil...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Stepping into a new year always gives one a chance to reflect on the lessons and trends of the prior year. In that spirit, we are pleased to present our annual selections for the five most intriguing...more
The next session of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is just around the corner. On October 8, 2019, SCOTUS will hear oral argument on three closely watched cases, Bostock v. Clayton Co., Georgia, Altitude...more
On August 15, 2019, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) added a question and answer to its list of frequently asked questions (FAQs) addressing, among other things, a growing concern for many employers: how to...more
The Fourth Circuit’s recent decision in Evangeline Parker v. Reema Consulting Services, Incorporated, 915 F.3d 297 (4th Cir. 2019) grabbed headlines for its controversial ruling that workplace gossip can support a sex...more
Just this morning, the U.S. Supreme Court finally agreed to hear three cases from the circuit courts that split on whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects against discrimination in the workplace based on...more
Dear Littler: I work in HR at a large, California-based company with branches across the country. We pride ourselves on our diverse and inclusive workforce, and encourage employees to self-identify their race/ethnicity and...more
In a landmark ruling, a federal court judge in Texas issued an opinion holding—unequivocally—that Title VII protects transgender individuals from discrimination based on their gender identity. Wittmer v. Phillips 66 Company,...more
On February 26, 2018, a majority of the entire U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held, in Zarda v. Altitude Express Inc., that Title VII prohibits workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. With...more
In recent years, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has increasingly focused its enforcement initiatives on prohibiting sexual orientation discrimination in the workplace. Now, the agency has a concrete...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In the first case following the Department of Justice’s pronouncement that Title VII does not prohibit discrimination against transgender persons on the basis of gender identity, a court in the Western...more
Matt Steinberg welcomes EEOC Commissioner Chai Feldblum for the second half of their wide-ranging conversation where Matt and Commissioner Feldblum discuss federal protection of employment-related LGBT rights, how the DOJ’s...more
In Lampley, et al. v. Missouri Commission on Human Rights, the Missouri Court of Appeals held that sex stereotyping can form the basis of a sex discrimination claim when the complaining party is gay, but should not be...more
LGBTQ workplace rights is perhaps the most rapidly evolving area in employment law. On October 4, 2017, United States Attorney General Jeff Sessions formally weighed in on the topic. He issued a memorandum to all federal...more
While the Seventh Circuit definitively has held that sexual orientation discrimination is discrimination “because of sex” and, therefore, a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (as reported by...more
On April 3, 2017, in Christiansen v. Omnicom Group, Inc., the Second Circuit held that it was bound by prior precedent in ruling that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not prohibit sexual orientation...more
As we observed in a recent post on the Seventh Circuit’s decision in Hively v. Ivy Tech Community College extending Title VII to sexual orientation claims, the Supreme Court will probably have to resolve the disagreement...more
Employers take note: On the heels of the Seventh Circuit landmark and controversial ruling last week that Title VII does, in fact, prohibit sexual orientation discrimination in the workplace, a group of prominent democratic...more
On March 23, Judge Stengel in the Eastern District of PA denied an employer’s motion to dismiss a Title VII case filed by an employee claiming discrimination and harassment based on her appearance and perceived sexual...more
On March 10, 2017, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held in Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital that Title VII does not prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Accordingly,...more