Key Discovery Points: BYOD Case Law Covering Subpoenas and Employee Handbooks
Your Guide to Dealing with Subpoenas Effectively
The Subpoena Playbook
AGG Talks: Healthcare Insights Podcast - Episode 8: What Healthcare Companies Need to Know When the Government Comes Knocking
AGG Talks: Antitrust and White-Collar Crime Roundup - The D.C. and Georgia Trump Indictments
What to Do When an Employee Receives a Subpoena
When Should Presidential Appointees Lawyer Up? [More with McGlinchey, Ep. 17]
Do I Need a Lawyer? Federal Employees Under Investigation [More with McGlinchey Ep. 1]
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - Government Investigative Demands
Polsinelli Podcast - Social Media at Work - What's Allowed and What Isn't?
What Not To Do If You Are Involved in a Federal Criminal Investigation
Do You Need A Lawyer for a Federal Grand Jury Subpoena?
On June 16, 2025, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in a case from the Third Circuit regarding the availability of a federal forum to raise constitutional challenges to a subpoena issued by a state attorney general....more
The Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in two cases today: First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Platkin, No. 24-781: This case concerns the appropriate forum for raising constitutional...more
Today, on the first day of the new term, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in nine cases: Gonzalez v. Google LLC, No. 21-1333: Section 203(c)(1) of the Communication Decency Act shields an...more
On Friday afternoon, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in the following cases: Trump v. Vance, No. 19-635: Whether as part of a district attorney’s criminal investigation targeting the President of...more
While the labor and employment law world is abuzz after the decisions in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby and Harris v. Quinn (cases this Blog will cover in the coming days), the United States Supreme Court also issued a decision...more
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that a public employee cannot be retaliated against by his employer based on testimony provided by him under subpoena in a criminal proceeding. In Lane v. Franks, the...more
U.S. Supreme Court Makes Unanimous Ruling in Lane v. Franks - The First Amendment protects a public employee from adverse employment action taken in retaliation for providing truthful sworn testimony, compelled by...more
Eight years ago the United States Supreme Court, in Garcetti v. Ceballos, instructed that speech undertaken pursuant to a public employee’s job duties is “employee” speech and not “citizen” speech, and hence is not protected...more
Providing truthful, sworn testimony outside the course of ordinary job duties is First Amendment speech for the purposes of retaliation lawsuits, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 19, 2004. The ruling prohibits a public...more
The Supreme Court’s recent unanimous decision in Lane v. Franks held that the First Amendment protects a public employee who provided truthful sworn testimony, compelled by subpoena, outside the course of his ordinary job...more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently held that a public employee's truthful sworn testimony, under subpoena, which was not part of his ordinary job duties, was entitled to First Amendment protection. See Lane v. Franks (June 19,...more
It has long been recognized that public employees are not excluded from First Amendment protection, and for more than 40 years the courts have wrestled with balancing the free speech rights of a public employee against the...more
Declaring that “public employees do not renounce their citizenship when they accept employment,” the Supreme Court of the United States held today that the First Amendment protects a public employee’s truthful sworn...more
On June 19, 2014, the United States Supreme Court decided Lane v. Franks, No. 13-483, holding that a public employee's sworn testimony is entitled to First Amendment protection when it is given outside the scope of ordinary...more