We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 28

Hitachi America benefits manager sentenced to 57 months for fraud

  • Masuda Funai Eifert & Mitchell Ltd
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 2 2009

The U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York announced that Dennis M. Dowd, formerly the senior manager of human resources at Hitachi America, Ltd. (Hitachi”) was sentenced to 57 months in prison for defrauding the Hitachi America Group Health and Welfare Plan (the “Plan) of more than $6 million

75 workers misclassified as independent contractors cost company over $500,000

  • Masuda Funai Eifert & Mitchell Ltd
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 7 2012

Last week, a U.S. District Court judge in Chicago issued a default judgment against Skokie Maid and Cleaning Service for failing to answer a complaint filed by the U.S. Department of Labor

EEOC sues construction company for religious discrimination

  • Masuda Funai Eifert & Mitchell Ltd
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 15 2010

On Thursday, February 11, 2010, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) announced that it had filed a lawsuit against T.A. Loving Company (a North Carolina based construction company) for denying a religious accommodation to several employees and then later firing them because of their religion

Company and its officers sued for unpaid wages

  • Masuda Funai Eifert & Mitchell Ltd
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 12 2012

Recently, the U.S. Department of Labor sued a New Hampshire painting and construction company and its president, vice-president and treasurer in their individual capacities to recover unpaid wages and liquidated damages for 57 employees

Failure to pay overtime poor record retention lawsuit

  • Masuda Funai Eifert & Mitchell Ltd
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 13 2010

As the economy continues to struggle, many current and former non-exempt (hourly) employees are paying closer attention to their wages and wondering whether they have been paid correctly for all hours worked

FMLA: caring for an adult child

  • Masuda Funai Eifert & Mitchell Ltd
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 8 2014

Recently, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reminded us that the Family and Medical Leave Act ("FMLA") provides eligible

Don’t breach your 401(k) plan fiduciary duty

  • Masuda Funai Eifert & Mitchell Ltd
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 8 2011

On November 1, 2011, the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) announced that, pursuant to a consent judgment and order filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California’s Southern Division, the former CEO and CFO of an East Los Angeles community hospital were ordered to repay over $600,000, plus post judgment interest, to the hospital’s retirement saving plan

Have you managed and eliminated the risk of an overtime lawsuit?

  • Masuda Funai Eifert & Mitchell Ltd
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 24 2011

Are a company’s independent contractors really employees?

Employees misclassified as independent contractors court rejects the defense that everybody else is doing it

  • Masuda Funai Eifert & Mitchell Ltd
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 10 2011

After an investigation by the United States Department of Labor (“USDOL”), on September 21, 2011, a U.S. District Court in Ohio ruled that Cascom, Inc. and its president Julia J. Gress (collectively “Cascom”) violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) by misclassifying its employees as independent contractors

Supreme Court rules some third-parties can sue for retaliation under Title VII

  • Masuda Funai Eifert & Mitchell Ltd
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 7 2011

On Monday, January 24, 2011, the United States Supreme Court (the "Court") reversed an en banc 10-to-6 decision of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals that held that because a third-party did not "engage in any statutorily protected activity either on his own behalf or on behalf of his fiancée, he was "not included in the class of persons for whom Congress created a retaliation cause of action."