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 85

Third-Party Litigation Funding: Are Businesses At Risk For More Class Actions?
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • June 7 2017

A recent trend has emerged in the class action landscape whereby a third-party funder pays the owner of a civil claim an up-front monetary payment in


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


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


Enough is enough: Retail Litigation Center advises court that the EEOC has overstepped in attack on releases
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • May 13 2014

As many of our loyal readers are aware, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District


Plaintiffs' claims in Wal-Mart survive to see the light of another day - court denies Wal-Mart's request for interlocutory appeal
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • December 12 2012

We previously blogged about Judge Charles R. Breyer’s September 21, 2012 Order denying Wal-Mart’s motion to dismiss the fourth amended complaint in the continuing saga of Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., No. 3:01-CV-02252 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 21, 2012


Eighth Circuit flexes its supervisory and enforcement powers in remanding rejection of an EEOC consent decree
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • February 9 2012

When negotiating settlement terms with the EEOC, employers can expect the EEOC to make great efforts to incorporate expansive enforcement mechanisms into a proposed consent decree


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 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


Implications for Employers In Navigating Transgender Employee Requests For Access To Employer Facilities
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • December 8 2015

A transgender woman filed a complaint last week against a large healthcare employer alleging sex discrimination in violation of Title VII. The


Just What The Doctor Ordered: Court Denies The EEOC’s Motion For Summary Judgment In ADA Suit Regarding Employer’s Wellness Program
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • September 23 2016

After an employer in Wisconsin implemented a wellness program that required employees to take a health risk assessment if they wanted to participate