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 66

Separation agreement attack redux EEOC takes another swing at employer’s standard release language, and loses on key claims

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 8 2014

Earlier this year, we blogged about the EEOC's aggressive attack on CVS Pharmacy Inc.'s standard release agreement which contained terms more

The EEOC secures injunctive relief in sex harassment lawsuit

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 1 2012

The U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada recently issued an opinion in EEOC v. Prospect Airport Services, Inc., U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103256 (D. Nev. July 25, 2012), which granted the EEOC sweeping injunctive relief and ordered the Defendant to implement steps to deter future violations of sexual harassment

Broad discovery allowed by magistrate judge in plaintiffs' quest to certify a class in the Dukes v. Wal-Mart litigation

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 15 2013

As our blog readers may remember, the fourth amended complaint filed by plaintiffs in Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., No. 3:01-CV-02252 (N.D. Cal

Managing transgender issues in the workplace following the EEOC's Macy ruling

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 11 2012

Although no federal statute explicitly prohibits employment discrimination based on gender identity, courts have increasingly held that transgender individuals are protected from discrimination under federal law

Washington Court holds employer farm’s ban on guests in employee housing illegal

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 10 2014

On November 3, 2014, Honorable Susan K. Cook of the Superior Court of the State of Washington in and for the County of Skagit entered an order

“What’s her phone number?” and other court-approved discovery requests in workplace class actions

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 13 2014

In the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the war continues over pre-certification access to the personal information of

The EEOC's "unique role" does not exempt the agency from a 300-day limitations period in Title VII pattern or practice cases

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 24 2012

In EEOC v. Princeton Healthcare System, No. 3:10-CV-04126-PGS-DEA, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150267 (D.N.J. Oct. 18, 2012), Judge Peter G. Sheridan of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey recently held that the EEOC must adhere to the 300-day limitations period as set forth by Section 706 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1984 when asserting a pattern or practice of unlawful employment action under Section 707 of Title VII

Court holds employer is responsible for conciliation failure because it refused to make counter-offer to EEOC's baseless monetary demand

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 20 2013

Recently, in EEOC v. Wedco, Inc., No. 3:12-CV-00523 (D. Nev. March 12, 1013), the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada considered whether

California court of appeal limits plaintiffs' request for discovery to locate new class representatives in a "headless" class action

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 5 2011

In a ruling on April 25, 2011, the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District in Starbucks v. Superior Court (Lords), No. G043650 (Cal. App. Apr. 25, 2011), overturned a trial court's order allowing a fishing expedition to find class representatives in a "headless" class action

New ruling in Berndt illustrates the key to ascertainability for class certification

  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 25 2012

Success or failure in workplace class action litigation is not unlike selling real estate - location, location, and location is all important