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 180

Court finds TwomblyIqbal pleading standard does not apply to class action defenses

  • Baker & Hostetler LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 6 2012

Alright, it’s a lawyer’s case, but it’s an important one for employers defending class actions

Court finds TwomblyIqbal pleading standard does not apply to class action defenses

  • Baker & Hostetler LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 8 2012

The Supreme Court made clear in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007), and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009), that a complaint cannot simply parrot the elements of a claim but must make specific factual allegations regarding the actions the plaintiffs seek to challenge

CAFA’s amount in controversy requirement: courts’ scrutiny of evidence varies greatly

  • Baker & Hostetler LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 4 2011

One of the most vexing issues for outside and in-house counsel is what type and how much evidence to provide in support of Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”) removal

California district court rejects proposed class action settlement

  • Baker & Hostetler LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 12 2013

It is axiomatic that the class action vehicle exists for the benefit of the claimants. An inherent conflict of interest may arise between the class

Court dismisses EEOC ADA pattern or practice claim as untimely

  • Baker & Hostetler LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 30 2012

It is no secret that the EEOC is asserting aggressive positions in several arenas, but a recent case reflects that it must continue to follow Title VII’s basic requirements despite its new enforcement prerogatives

California Supreme Court's long-awaited ruling in Brinker provides employers favorable interpretation of meal break requirements, clarifies rest break timing requirement

  • Baker & Hostetler LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 13 2012

At long last, the California Supreme Court has issued the decision that every California employer has been waiting forBrinker

Sixth Circuit affirms refusal to certify disparate impact sex discrimination case

  • Baker & Hostetler LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 31 2013

On May 30, 2013, the Sixth Circuit issued its decision in Davis v. Cintas Corporation, Case No. 10-1662 (6th Cir. May 30, 2013), in which it upheld a

Sixth Circuit affirms dismissal of class claims regarding disability benefits

  • Baker & Hostetler LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 29 2014

ERISA benefit claims are frequently of only modest size individually, but can become overwhelming in a class context. A decision this week from the

District court refuses to certify class of “non-liturgical” protestant navy chaplains

  • Baker & Hostetler LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 8 2014

Given the rich diversity and array of religions, and the First Amendment prohibitions both on the establishment of religion and impeding the free

Sixth Circuit remands Memphis Title VII disparate impact case, yet again

  • Baker & Hostetler LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 26 2014

It’s hard not to feel sorry for the residents of Memphis, Tennessee. Depending on which source you consult, its violent crime rate hovers between