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 99

The declining value of non-disparagement provisions in separation agreements

  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 3 2010

When entering into settlements or release agreements with departing employees, some employers want to bargain "hard" for non-disparagement provisions

Employer’s intrusion into employee’s Facebook page may be invasion of privacy

  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 9 2012

A federal district court in New Jersey recently addressed a question about which employers have long speculated, but had no answer, whether an employee can successfully assert an invasion of privacy tort claim against an employer that makes unauthorized access to the individual's Facebook account

Employer directive that employee get unspecified “counseling” treated as unlawful “medical examination”

  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 6 2012

Heaven help the misguided employer who instructs an employee to go for unspecified "counseling."

Employee not eligible for FMLA leave still protected by non-discrimination provisions

  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 6 2012

Many employers offer leave of absence benefits to employees that supplement leaves of absence provided by the Family and Medical Leave Act

Lawfully fired employee may claim “chilled” exercise of FMLA rights despite receiving leave

  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 3 2011

Employers have the duty not to "interfere with" the exercise of any right under the Family and Medical Leave Act

Fragrance-free workplace policy & work at home may have been reasonable accommodations for employee with asthma and chemical sensitivity to “Japanese Cherry Blossom”

  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 6 2012

A federal court in Ohio recently ruled that an employee with asthma and chemical sensitivity to perfumes and scented products could pursue an Americans with Disabilities Act claim against her employer for not reasonably accommodating her disability, despite the many (albeit delayed) accommodations offered by her employer

Is the scope of protected “opposition” shrinking?

  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 1 2012

Section 704 of Title VII protects an employee from retaliation for "opposing" the employer's illegal discrimination or for "participating" in a proceeding raising a claim of discrimination banned by Title VII

When both frivolous and non-frivolous claims are brought, defendant’s victory on frivolous claims may justify partial attorney fee award

  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 11 2011

Defendants that prevail in certain discrimination cases are entitled to attorney fee awards, against their opposing plaintiffs, under the Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Awards Act, 42 U.S.C. 1988(b), when the plaintiffs' claims are determined to be "frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation."

Employee’s opposition to LBGTQ community: protected religious belief or unprotected bigotry?

  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 1 2012

The lines between employees' protected religious beliefs and employees' unprotected opinions on social issues are often blurry

Sister companies may be a “single employer” under Title VII

  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 5 2012

Businesses that have a common owner naturally bear some similarities