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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 71

U.S. Supreme Court recognizes fundamental right to same-sex marriage nationwide: impact of the decision on employers
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • June 26 2015

In a landmark decision, today the U.S. Supreme Court recognized a fundamental right for same-sex couples to marry throughout the country. In a 5-4


Stock-not so-well: officers denied class certification of age discrimination claims (again)
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • May 27 2015

As we reported here to our loyal blog readers, in April 2014, the Ninth Circuit overturned an order denying class certification of age discrimination


The Supreme Court weighs the Constitutionality of restricting marriage to opposite sex couples, and the impact their decision may have for employers
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • April 28 2015

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument on two questions regarding the Constitutionality of state laws limiting marriage to opposite-sex


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


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


EEOC pushes its strategic enforcement plan and advocates for transgender workplace protections under Title VII
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • September 30 2014

No federal statute explicitly prohibits employment discrimination based on gender identity or expression. Nevertheless, in recent years, the EEOC has


Court upholds jury verdict that EEOC is not entitled to award of putative damages
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • August 29 2014

On August 21, 2014, in the case EEOC v. Swissport Fueling, Inc., Case No. CV-10-02101-PHX-GMS (D. Ariz. Aug. 21, 2014) (a case we previously blogged


SCOTUS agrees to consider whether pregnant workers must be able to perform the essential functions of the job
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • July 9 2014

Last week, in Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc.,the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to answer the question of whether an employer is required to


Central District of California denies class certification and it wasn’t even close
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • June 23 2014

Earlier this week, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California sent plaintiffs seeking to represent a putative class a reminder


California Supreme Court finds plaintiffs’ use of statistical evidence in class wage and hour litigation doesn’t add up: why California employers now have a higher probability of success after Duran v. U.S. Bank
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • June 5 2014

With years in the making, the long-awaited decision of the California Supreme Court in Duran v. U.S. Bank has finally arrived and represents a