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 76

The EEOC rules that existing federal law prohibits employment discrimination based on sexual orientation
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • July 20 2015

In a landmark ruling on July 15, 2015 in _____ name of charging party kept secret v. Foxx, EEOC Appeal No. 2012-24738-FAA-03 (July 15, 2015), the U


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


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


Court limits the EEOC's investigative power by finding that the EEOC is not entitled to "unconstrained investigative authority"
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • November 29 2012

On November 19, 2012, in EEOC v. McLane Company, Inc., No. 12-CV-02469 (D. Ariz. Nov. 19, 2012), Judge G. Murray Snow of the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona held that the EEOC’s authority to investigate charges of discrimination is not unlimited


"Re-booted" claims survive motion to dismiss in Dukes fourth amended complaint
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • September 27 2012

We previously blogged about what could have been the final chapter for one of the smaller “rebooted” class actions following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011), but a September 21, 2012 ruling by Charles R. Breyer of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California will allow the case to see another day


Court finds the EEOC's delay in pursuing lawsuit unreasonable
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • July 19 2012

On June 28, 2012, Judge Thomas D. Schroeder of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina gave employers an additional tool for combating an increasingly common EEOC practice of dragging out investigations and the initiation of lawsuits


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


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


Standing defenses in class action litigation under Title VII
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • April 9 2012

It is not uncommon for an employer to face vague or overbroad class claims premised on one employee’s injury limited to a specific set of facts


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