Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 504: Listen and Learn -- Motions for Judgment as a Matter of Law and Motions for New Trial (Civ Pro)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 306: Spotlight on Civil Procedure (Part 3 – The Civil Lawsuit)
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 412: Listen and Learn -- Motions for Summary Judgment
What Litigants Need to Know about Summary Judgment
JONES DAY TALKS®: Tiffany v. Costco Raises Trademark Infringement, Counterfeiting Questions
Patent Infringement: Successful Litigation Stays the "Course"
Podcast: Non-binding Guidance: Examining FDA’s Enforcement Authority Over Stem Cell Clinics and Compounders
K&L Gates Triage: Avoiding the Risks Associated with Mandatory Vaccination Programs
In May 2025, the Supreme Court of Washington overruled previous precedent regarding the deliberate intent to injure exception related to workers’ compensation immunity for employers, finding that an employee may sue its...more
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
The exclusivity provision of the North Carolina Workers’ Compensation Act (the “Act”) normally prevents an employee from suing his employer in civil court for work injuries. The employee is normally relegated to filing a...more
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
Washington Cnty. Sch. Bd. v. Davis, 50 Fla. L. Weekly D247 (Fla. 1st DCA Jan. 23, 2025) - A trial court’s denial of summary judgment was overturned after an appellate court found that a job applicant failed to meet the...more
In a recently published opinion, the Appellate Division, Second Department, upheld a Suffolk County Supreme Court decision granting summary judgment in favor of an injured bridge worker who slipped backwards off a scaffold...more
Key Points: New York appellate decision gives defense counsel firm ground on which to defend a standard § 240(1) case. In Simpertegui v. Carlyle House Inc., 209 N.Y.S.3d (1st Dept. May 9, 2024), a “ladder-fall” case, the...more
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
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion in Cariene Cadena v. Customer Connexx LLC on July 10, 2024, reversing the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada’s summary judgment ruling in favor of...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: On January 18, 2024, in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., the California Supreme Court addressed the split in appellate authority as to whether trial courts have inherent authority to strike a PAGA...more
On January 5, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued a decision in Kellogg v. Ball State University that expanded the scope of potential evidence plaintiffs may rely on to support their Equal Pay Act...more
In Kim v. Reins, the Supreme Court was faced with the following question: Do employees lose standing to pursue a PAGA claim if they settle and dismiss their individual claims for Labor Code violations? To the surprise of many...more
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
In an important wage-and-hour decision for franchisors, Salazar, et al. v. the McDonald’s Corp., et al., the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that employees of one of the hamburger giant’s California-based franchisees...more
North Carolina’s Retaliatory Employment Discrimination Act (REDA) prohibits employers from taking retaliatory action against employees on the basis of workers’ compensation, OSHA, wage and hour, and other state labor law...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: After several years of litigation, in Connor v. First Student, Inc. the California Supreme Court decided that the California Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act (“ICRAA”) was not...more
On August 10, 2018, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled that the federal Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (RUIA) completely preempts the Massachusetts Earned Sick Time Law (ESTL). ...more
Douglas Troester v. Starbucks Corporation (July 26, 2018) - On July 26, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued a decision entitled Douglas Troester v. Starbucks Corporation, No. S234969, which should be of concern to...more
On August 6, 2012, Douglas Troester, a former shift supervisor at a Starbucks location, filed a lawsuit against Starbucks in state court in Los Angeles, California. Mr. Troester filed his lawsuit on behalf of himself and a...more
Last week, in Troester v. Starbucks, a unanimous California Supreme Court held that California labor statutes and wage orders do not incorporate federal de minimis work exceptions. Yet, the Court declined to define when, if...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: On April 2, 2018, the New Jersey Appellate Division reversed an order granting summary judgment to Defendant Legal Cost Control, Inc., finding that New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination (LAD) may apply to...more
A recent Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision has upheld that successful plaintiffs are entitled to non-economic damages under Pennsylvania’s Whistleblower Law, 43 P.S. §§1421-1428 (the “Law”). In Bailets v. Pa. Turnpike...more
Synopsis: In an ADEA collective action alleging that a community college discriminated on the basis of age when it announced it would no longer employ any person receiving an annuity from the State Universities Retirement...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: California employers must use the formula prescribed by the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement Manual to calculate overtime on flat sum bonuses, not the bonus overtime formula used under federal law....more
On December 29, California’s Second Appellate District held that employees who settle and dismiss their individual wage claims may not assert claims under the state’s Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) on behalf of other...more