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.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 10

Ohio Supreme Court expands claims for wrongful termination in violation of public policy

  • Ogletree Deakins
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 9 2011

A thorn in the side of many Ohio employers is the claim for wrongful termination in violation of public policy

Layoff upon return from military leave may qualify as a “reemployment position” under the USERRA

  • Ogletree Deakins
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 18 2012

According to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) requirement that a returning service member be reemployed in the position that he or she would have occupied had that employment not been interrupted by a military commitment does not preclude layoff or termination of a returning service member

The USERRA does not provide a claim for hostile work environment

  • Ogletree Deakins
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 28 2011

The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) was enacted to prohibit civilian employers from discriminating against employees engaged in military service, and states that employees who perform military service "shall not be denied initial employment, reemployment, retention in employment, promotion, or any benefit of employment" on the basis of that service

Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) is not an “adverse employment action” for purposes of federal anti-discrimination laws

  • Ogletree Deakins
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 9 2011

In order to support a claim of employment discrimination, an individual typically must show that an “adverse employment action” was taken, and that such action was based upon a protected characteristic

Statute of limitations on teacher’s discrimination claim begins to run on date plaintiff received notice of reduction in force

  • Ogletree Deakins
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 1 2008

Here, the Appellate Division affirmed the State Board of Education’s determination that a non-tenured teacher’s discrimination claim was barred by the statute of limitations, where the teacher received notice that her contract would not be renewed due to a RIF, but did not file a discrimination claim until after the 90-day limitations period expired

Rescinding employment benefit extended only to employees with military obligations does not violate the USERRA

  • Ogletree Deakins
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 8 2009

The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) protects members of the armed services against employment discrimination related to the benefits of their employment

Replacing employee with younger, less experienced person is not always age discrimination

  • Ogletree Deakins
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 22 2009

A public school music teacher who was replaced by a less experienced teacher eleven years her junior was unable to show that her age rather than her work-performance was the basis of the non-renewal of her contract

High Court rules government employer’s search of text messages was reasonable

  • Ogletree Deakins
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 17 2010

On June 17, with Justice Anthony Kennedy writing a unanimously-supported opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a police department’s search of an officer’s text messages was reasonable and did not violate the officer’s Fourth Amendment rights

USERRA coverage may be triggered prior to formal military orders

  • Ogletree Deakins
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 4 2010

The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA) was enacted to encourage non-career military service and to prevent discrimination against military service members

Professor’s whistleblower claim may proceed to trial

  • Ogletree Deakins
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 27 2012

Professor Ivor van Heerden’s whistleblower claim against Louisiana State University (LSU) now appears likely to proceed to trial, (Van Heerden v. Bd. of Supervisors of La. State Univ. and Agricultural and Mech. Coll., 10-155 (M.D. La.)), after Judge James Brady of the Middle District of Louisiana denied LSU’s motion for summary judgment on van Heerden’s whistleblower claim