News & Analysis as of

State Labor Laws › Summary Judgment › Employment Discrimination

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

Connecticut Appellate Court Upholds Employer’s Right to Require In-Office Work

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

The Connecticut Appellate Court recently affirmed summary judgment in favor of a law firm employer, holding that a legal assistant’s request to work entirely remotely during the COVID-19 pandemic was not a reasonable...more

EDRM - Electronic Discovery Reference Model

Privilege Log Helps Defeat Summary Judgment on One Count

EDRM - Electronic Discovery Reference Model on

In Conner v. Stark & Stark, P.C., 2025 WL 1694052 (D.N.J. June 17, 2025), defendant’s privilege log helped partially defeat defendant’s summary judgment motion....more

Holland & Hart LLP

Tenth Circuit Weighs in on Reductions in Force: Takeaways for Employers

Holland & Hart LLP on

The Tenth Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of Spirit AeroSystems in a discrimination case related to a 2013 reduction-in-force (RIF). The plaintiffs had alleged that the company targeted older workers in a...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

Major Changes Coming to Employment Discrimination Claims in Virginia

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC on

Governor Ralph Northam signed two bills that both go into law on July 1, 2020, and will drastically alter employment discrimination claims in Virginia. The Virginia Values Act ("VVA") (Senate Bill 868) makes sweeping...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Appellate Court Considers the Illinois “Employee Credit Privacy Act”

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: On December 3, 2019, the Appellate Court of Illinois affirmed summary judgment in favor of a public utility company that considered credit checks for individuals applying for a customer service...more

Payne & Fears

Key California Employment Law Cases: February 2018

Payne & Fears on

Rojas v. HSBC Card Services Inc., 228 Cal. Rptr. 3d 640 (2018)- Summary: Installing recording device and recording calls on company phones renders actions intentional under California Invasion of Privacy Act. ...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Beware the Rumor Mill: Massachusetts Court Finds Reporting of Rumored Office Romance May Be Protected Activity

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: A Massachusetts federal court has found that reporting a rumored office romance and complaining about paramour favoritism can be protected activity that is protected by anti-retaliation laws. The court also...more

7 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