News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Attorney's Fees › Title VII

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 -
Fisher Phillips

Employer Impact Guide to the Supreme Court’s 2024-2025 Term: 12 Cases That Reshaped Your Workplace, Industry, or Litigation...

Fisher Phillips on

As the Supreme Court prepares for its next term to begin October 6, let’s look back on all the SCOTUS cases from the past year that impacted your workplace, industry, and litigation exposure. Here’s a quick guide to 12 times...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

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 - 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

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court - May 2016 #3

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued decisions in three cases on May 19, 2016: CRST Van Expedited, Inc. v. EEOC, No. 14-1375: The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) brought a suit in its own name...more

Fisher Phillips

Supreme Court Leaves Massive Attorney's Fee Award Against EEOC Unresolved

Fisher Phillips on

But Decision Could Still Be Helpful For Employers - Today, in a unanimous 8-0 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to issue a definitive ruling on whether an employer is entitled to recover nearly $5 million dollars...more

Littler

Supreme Court Holds a Party May be Entitled to Attorneys' Fees Absent a Favorable Ruling on the Merits

Littler on

On May 19, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in CRST, Inc. v. EEOC, which addressed the definition of a “prevailing party” who may be awarded attorneys’ fees in Title VII cases. Although the Court ultimately...more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

An Open Love Letter to Justice Clarence Thomas

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP on

I admit it. I have a crush on Justice Thomas. Today’s unanimous Supreme Court opinion in CRST Van Expedited, Inc. v. EEOC – holding that a merit-based dismissal is not necessary for a defendant to qualify as the “prevailing...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides RST Van Expedited, Inc. v. EEOC

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP on

On May 19, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States decided RST Van Expedited, Inc. v. EEOC, No. 14-1375, holding that a defendant may be a prevailing party—and therefore entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees under...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument In EEOC v. CRST Van Expedited, Inc.

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in EEOC v. CRST Van Expedited, Inc. Involving the largest fee sanction award ever levied against the EEOC – nearly $4.7 million – EEOC v. CRST Van Expedited, Inc....more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Truckin’ To The Top Court: CRST Files Final Reply Brief Before Supreme Court Argument Against EEOC

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In high-stakes litigation brought by the EEOC against trucking company CRST Van Expedited, Inc., (“CRST”), CRST recently submitted its final reply brief before the U.S. Supreme Court hears oral argument in the case later this...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

“We Don’t Want To Pay $4.7 Million” – EEOC Files Its Supreme Court Brief in CRST Fee Sanction Case

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

As we recently blogged here, EEOC v. CRST Van Expedited, Inc. is an important case on the Supreme Court’s docket that employers absolutely need to monitor. At issue is whether attorneys’ fees are appropriate in instances...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Briefing For The Big Bucks: CRST Asks U.S. Supreme Court For Attorneys’ Fees From The EEOC

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

EEOC v. CRST Van Expedited, Inc. is a key case for all employers. We have been tracking the developments in this case since its inception. Now it has reached the U.S. Supreme Court on the issue of whether attorneys’...more

Zelle LLP

Employment Law Navigator – Week in Review: December 7, 2015

Zelle LLP on

‘Tis the season for holiday cheer and employer-sponsored celebrations. It’s a good time to heed the words of sage employment lawyers who want to help you avoid celebration-related complaints, charges and lawsuits. Last...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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide