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 110

Exclusion for sexual misconduct precludes duty to defend employer

  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 14 2011

Applying Texas law, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has held that an exclusion for claims "arising out of" sexual misconduct applied to bar coverage for a medical group for a lawsuit alleging that its employee sexually assaulted a patient. Nat'l Fire Ins

Passage of Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) in the US opens the door for personalized medicine

  • Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 29 2008

On May 21, President Bush signed the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA

Proposed regulations on grandfathered plans under new health care law issued

  • Armstrong Teasdale LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 23 2010

The Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services and the Treasury have proposed "interim final" regulations defining the circumstances under which an existing health care plan will lose its status as a "grandfathered plan" under the new health care law

Exclusion for sexual misconduct precludes duty to defend against employer

  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 7 2011

Applying Texas law, the United States Court of Appeals has held that an exclusion for claims “arising out of” sexual misconduct applied to bar coverage for a medical group for a lawsuit alleging that its employee sexually assaulted a patient

Seventh Circuit clarifies that defendants may remove class actions unless it is “legally impossible” for $5 million or more to be at stake

  • Mayer Brown LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 18 2011

In a pair of recent decisions, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has held that federal courts have jurisdiction over a class action that has been removed from state court when a defendant estimates that the $5 million amount-in-controversy requirement has been met, unless the plaintiff can show that it would be legally impossible to recover that amount

Alternative treatment

  • Kennedys Law LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • July 4 2011

During his employment by the Defendant as a joiner between 1974 and 1980 the Claimant was negligently exposed to asbestos, as a result of which he contracted mesothelioma

EEOC suggests some required health risk assessments violate ADA

  • Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz PC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 13 2009

Employers who require their employees to participate in a health risk assessment in order to be eligible for health insurance coverage may be unknowingly violating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA

Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008

  • Locke Lord LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 22 2008

On May 21, 2008, President George W. Bush signed into law “The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008” (H.R. 493; hereinafter “GINA”

Critical end-of-year issues arising from federal health care reform

  • Sullivan & Worcester LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 20 2010

We want to highlight two of the many new federal health care reform requirements that require immediate attention and may require amendments to your existing welfare plan documents

Result of the second leg: Scottish Government 2 - Insurers 0

  • MacRoberts LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • April 14 2011

In January 2010, we told you that Lord Emslie in the Court of Session had rejected a challenge from a group of leading insurance companies in relation to the Damages (Asbestos-related Conditions)(Scotland) Act 2009 ("the 2009 Act"