A federal district court decision earlier this year serves as a blunt reminder to employers carefully to review their employment policies to ensure they accurately reflect their employees' entitlement, if any, to leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act ("FMLA").
Check your policy — existence of FMLA policy leads to equitable estoppel
Popular related articles
-
Circular beach towel's trademark is invalid (Kelley Drye & Warren LLP)
In the late 1980s, Clemens Franek sought and received trademark registration status for his "radical" round beach towel.
-
Western District of New York upholds non-compete and grants TRO (Seyfarth Shaw LLP)
Plaintiff IDG USA, LLC (“IDG”), a Georgia company with its principal place of business in North Carolina, commenced an action against a former employee, Kevin J. Schupp (“Schupp”), a New York resident, alleging breaches of a Non-Compete Agreement, breach of a Confidentiality Agreement, unfair competition, and theft of trade secrets.
-
Shutting down corporate pick-pockets (Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP)
A 10-year employee accounting manager systematically transfers amounts via ACH to her personal checking account.
-
Employer wins “cat's paw” case (Foley & Lardner LLP)
On August 11, 2010, a federal court rejected a terminated employee's "cat's paw" argument.
-
Massachusetts personnel records statute amended to require employers to notify employees when negative information is placed in personnel records (Goodwin Procter LLP)
Massachusetts recently enacted an economic development statute which contains an important amendment to the Massachusetts Personnel Records Statute, G.L. c. 149, § 52C.
-
Western District of New York upholds non-compete and grants TRO (Seyfarth Shaw LLP)
Plaintiff IDG USA, LLC (“IDG”), a Georgia company with its principal place of business in North Carolina, commenced an action against a former employee, Kevin J. Schupp (“Schupp”), a New York resident, alleging breaches of a Non-Compete Agreement, breach of a Confidentiality Agreement, unfair competition, and theft of trade secrets.
-
Shutting down corporate pick-pockets (Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP)
A 10-year employee accounting manager systematically transfers amounts via ACH to her personal checking account.
-
Employer wins “cat's paw” case (Foley & Lardner LLP)
On August 11, 2010, a federal court rejected a terminated employee's "cat's paw" argument.
-
Massachusetts personnel records statute amended to require employers to notify employees when negative information is placed in personnel records (Goodwin Procter LLP)
Massachusetts recently enacted an economic development statute which contains an important amendment to the Massachusetts Personnel Records Statute, G.L. c. 149, § 52C.
-
D.C. Circuit decision ratchets up the risk for employers who use location tracking (Littler Mendelson PC)
Employers are increasingly tracking their employees' whereabouts as smartphones, laptops, and vehicles equipped with location-tracing technology become ever more prevalent.
-
Circular beach towel's trademark is invalid (Kelley Drye & Warren LLP)
In the late 1980s, Clemens Franek sought and received trademark registration status for his "radical" round beach towel.
-
Boundary dispute over strip of driveway ends up in court (DMH Stallard LLP)
An argument over a narrow strip of land has left a mother and son facing massive costs after their case was heard in the Court of Appeal recently.
-
Western District of New York upholds non-compete and grants TRO (Seyfarth Shaw LLP)
Plaintiff IDG USA, LLC (“IDG”), a Georgia company with its principal place of business in North Carolina, commenced an action against a former employee, Kevin J. Schupp (“Schupp”), a New York resident, alleging breaches of a Non-Compete Agreement, breach of a Confidentiality Agreement, unfair competition, and theft of trade secrets.
-
The Court of Appeal provides guidance on the rules on equitable set-off; Geldof Metaalconstructie NV v Simon Carves Ltd (2010) (Mills & Reeve LLP)
Set-off effectively allows one person to deduct from sums he owes to another, amounts that the other person owes to him.
-
Specsavers v ASDA - a real eye-opener? (Herbert Smith LLP)
The High Court has held that one of ASDA's marketing straplines used to promote its in-store optician took unfair advantage of Specsavers' Community Trade Marks (CTM) under Article 9(1)(c) of the CTM Regulation, but rejected its infringement claims made under Article 9(1)(b) and for passing-off.
-
Department of Labor puts unpaid internships under the spotlight (Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP)
With the publishing of Fact Sheet #71, the U.S. Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division (“WHD”) has sent clear warning signals to for-profit employers who hire unpaid interns that interns are not free labor.
-
New York Department of Labor interprets Section 193 of Labor Law as forbidding deductions from wages for amounts owed to an employer (Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP)
In an opinion letter dated January 10, 2010, the New York State Department of Labor ("NYDOL") stated its position that employers cannot deduct from an employee's wages amounts owed by the employee to his employer, including for overpayments or repayment of a loan, even with the employee's written authorization.
-
How private are personal emails - Part IV: Stengart v. Loving Care reaches the New Jersey Supreme Court (Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP)
In previous Electronic Discovery Updates, we examined the developing issue of whether the attorney-client privilege protects emails between an employee and her attorney sent from the employee's personal, web-based, password protected email account - such as a Yahoo!, Gmail, or Hotmail account - but accessed on a work computer.
-
Spotlight on the judiciary: Judge Frank Maas (Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP)
"Spotlight on the Judiciary" highlights the body of work of a judge who has made a significant impact on the development of e-discovery law.
-
Do not judge a person by his or her title: avoiding the government’s crackdown on misclassification of individuals as independent contractors (Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP)
In the midst of an uncertain economic climate, many employers have favored hiring individuals they deem to be independent contractors instead of employees.
If you are interested in submitting an article to Lexology, please contact Andrew Teague at ateague@lexology.com.