It’s not very often that the Connecticut Supreme Court considers employment law issues. But today, two notable cases are being argued in front of the court. Both could have an impact on employers in the state. In Patino v. Birken Manufacturing, the court is being asked to consider whether a hostile work environment harassment claim… Continue Reading
Tag Archives: Supreme Court
Conn. Supreme Court: Alleged Knowing and Deliberate Discovery Misconduct Not Enough to Warrant New Trial
Posted in Discrimination & Harassment, LitigationIt’s so rare nowadays that the Connecticut Supreme Court rules on discrimination cases that, when I first took a look at its new decision in Duart v. Department of Corrections (download here) — officially released next week — I got excited. After all, the case is based on a claims of gender, race and sexual… Continue Reading
BREAKING: U.S. Supreme Court Supports Fairly Broad “Ministerial Exception” to Anti-Discrimination Laws
Posted in CHRO & EEOC, Discrimination & Harassment, Featured, Highlight, LitigationIn a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court today gave some teeth to the “ministerial exception” that, in essence, precludes some employees of religious institutions from suing them under federal discrimination laws. I’ve discussed the exception in various posts over the years here and here. Its been supported in the Second Circuit and by the… Continue Reading
Class Action Waiver For Employment? Not So Fast, Says the NLRB
Posted in Class Actions, Labor Law & NRLBLast year, I talked a lot about a U.S. Supreme Court case that seemed to open the door for employers to use mandatory arbitration agreements that precluded employees from using class actions to sue their employers. But I noted at the time that this was a quickly shifting landscape. A few days ago, the NLRB… Continue Reading
Wal-Mart v. Dukes: What The Class-Action Decision Really Means for Employers
Posted in Class Actions, Discrimination & Harassment, Featured, Highlight, LitigationOver the last 24 hours, there’s been a lot written about the Supreme Court’s decision yesterday in Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes. Frankly, all of them are starting to say the same thing: The decision is going to hamper all class-action discrimination cases going forward. But that statement tends to simplify the decision a bit too… Continue Reading
The Quickly Shifting Landscape of Class Actions and Arbtirations
Posted in Class Actions, Litigation, Wage & HourNow that the dust has settled a bit, it’s time to look at the long-term impact of last month’s Supreme Court decision in AT&T v. Concepcion for employment matters. (For a great analysis of the decision itself, see this SCOTUSblog post.) All the analysis that has been coming out seems to suggest that there are two main… Continue Reading
Are Some Employment Law Class Actions in Jeopardy? New Supreme Court Case Suggests Path
Posted in Class Actions, Discrimination & Harassment, Litigation, Wage & HourThe U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, yesterday held that the Federal Arbitration Act preempts state laws that discuss or limit arbitration agreements on the availability of class action arbitration procedures. The case, AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion (download here) isn’t an employment law case (it concerns whether AT&T should have charged consumers sales tax on… Continue Reading
The Strong Pull of a “Day in Court”; Lessons Learned from Wal-Mart v. Dukes
Posted in Class ActionsNearly everyone has chimed in over the oral argument in Wal-mart v. Dukes over the last 36 hours up at the Supreme Court. And nearly everyone seems to be predicting an outright victory to Wal-mart. Because we don’t even have a decision yet, I’ll leave it to others to prognosticate (read: guess) what will really… Continue Reading
BREAKING: U.S. Supreme Court Allows “Cat’s Paw” Theory of Liability in Discrimination Cases
Posted in Discrimination & Harassment, LitigationTime and again, pundits suggest that the U.S. Supreme Court now is among the most conservative in decades and, by extension, pro-business. If that’s the case, they’re going to be awfully surprised with today’s 8-0 ruling in Staub v. Proctor Hospital (download here) in which the court broadened the methods that an employee can use… Continue Reading
Supreme Court Recap: Creating a “Zone of Interest” Under Title VII Retaliation Law
Posted in Discrimination & Harassment, LitigationThe United States Supreme Court today, in an 8-0 decision (Justice Kagan recused herself), ruled that Title VII retaliation provisions include protection to those people who have suffered an adverse employment action and are in the same "zone of interest" as another employee who filed a charge. What does that mean? Good question. First,… Continue Reading
Breaking: U.S. Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Wal-Mart Class Action Case
Posted in LitigationThe U.S. Supreme Court this morning agreed to hear Wal-Mart’s appeal of a decision that granted certification to what would be the largest employment discrimination class action case ever heard in the United States. The SCOTUSBlog has the definitive wrapup here. The underlying case has raised allegations of sex discrimination by current and female workers… Continue Reading
Oral Argument Transcript Now Available from U.S. Supreme Court Argument in Cigna v. Amara
Posted in LitigationIt’s rare for a case from Connecticut to make it all the way to the United States Supreme Court. But this week, a case did just that. I’ve previously discussed the case of Cigna v. Amara in many posts which you can read here. The case ultimately concerns the receipt of retirement benefits and whether… Continue Reading
U.S. Supreme Court Agrees to Consider Connecticut Employee Benefits Case
Posted in Class ActionsEmployee benefit cases (better known as ERISA cases, after the Employee Retirement Income Security Act) aren’t the most exciting topic in the world. At this point, just by my very mention of ERISA, I’m imagining your mouse wandering off to view another page. But yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear an important case… Continue Reading
Breaking: U.S. Supreme Court Affirms Arbitration Provisions in Employment Disputes; What It Means for Employers
Posted in LitigationIn a 5-4 decision released this morning in Rent-A-Center, West, Inc. v. Jackson (download here), the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a challenge to an arbitration agreement that purported to address all matters arising out of an employment dispute. This decision isn’t the easiest to digest. First, understand that arbitration provisions governed by federal law have… Continue Reading
Breaking: U.S. Supreme Court Rules that Two-Member NLRB Decisions Are Improper; Public Employer Can View Employee Text Messages
Posted in Human Resources (HR) Compliance, Labor Law & NRLB, Laws and Regulations, Litigation, Wage & HourThe U.S. Supreme Court issued decisions in two important labor & employment law cases this morning. Because the cases are limited to some labor law issues and public employers, the impact on private employers may not be immediately felt. But the decisions are notable nonetheless. First, the court issued a 5-4 decision in New Process… Continue Reading
Why the Connecticut Supreme Court’s Ruling in ‘Ziotas’ is Significant to Employers
Posted in Wage & HourYesterday, I discussed the Connecticut Supreme Court’s decision in Ziotas v. The Reardon Law Firm, in which the court held that a bonus does not constitute "wages" when the bonus is discretionary and is not ascertainable by applying a formula. I’ve also discussed the background of the case in a prior post which I won’t… Continue Reading
Can You Tweet Your Favorite U.S. Supreme Court Case? Help Publicize the Bar Foundation’s Technology Symposium!
Posted in Human Resources (HR) ComplianceThis post continues my public service outreach on a program developed by the Connecticut Bar Foundation. As I mentioned earlier this month, I am chairing what I expect will be a terrific educational program on April 9th at UConn Law School on how technology is changing the practice of law. Full details to this free… Continue Reading
Quick Hits: Paycheck Fairness Act, CHRO, Employee Misclassification, Amara v. CIGNA followup
Posted in CHRO & EEOC, Discrimination & Harassment, Human Resources (HR) Compliance, Legislative Developments, Wage & HourIt’s a big holiday today. So, let me be the first to say: Happy Evacuation Day — at least to my fellow blogger at Compliance Building. To everyone else, a Happy St. Patrick’s Day. Its been some time since my last look around the employment law universe, so here’s some quick hits of what else… Continue Reading
Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Title VII Test Case; Will It Be Significant For Employers Or Just Academics?
Posted in CHRO & EEOC, Discrimination & Harassment, LitigationThere is a common misconception about the U.S. Supreme Court that all cases that it rules on are created equal. They’re not. Some take on more significance than others. Case in point: Lewis v. City of Chicago, which was argued yesterday (transcript available here). I’ve previously discussed the case in an earlier post. The… Continue Reading
BREAKING: U.S. Supreme Court Declines Review of Church Homes (Avery Heights) v. NLRB Case
Posted in Labor Law & NRLB, LitigationThe U.S. Supreme Court this morning, without comment, declined to overturn a NLRB decision that found that Church Homes (also known locally as Avery Heights) committed an unfair labor practice when it failed to reinstate the permanently replaced economic strikers upon their unconditional offer to return to work. I’ve discussed this case extensively in some… Continue Reading
U.S. Supreme Court To Decide Soon Whether to Take Church Homes (Avery Heights) v. NLRB Case
Posted in Labor Law & NRLB, LitigationBack in June, I talked about an important case arising out of Connecticut, that dates all the way back to a long and notable strike by employees in 1999 against the Avery Heights facility in Hartford, Connecticut. You can read the full post about Church Homes (d/b/a Avery Heights) v. NLRB here. As I said… Continue Reading
Quick Hits: DPUC’s Ban on Personnel Decisions, Title VII Deadlines, Two Member NLRB Panels, Arbitrations, SCOTUS
Posted in Discrimination & Harassment, Labor Law & NRLB, Laws and Regulations, Legislative Developments, LitigationAnother manic Monday. So it’s time to roll out another edition of quick hits where I highlight stories you might have missed over the last week or two. Today’s Hartford Courant reports on a move by the DPUC to prohibit some companies from laying off workers. My law partner, Joshua Hawks-Ladds — who is also chair… Continue Reading
Connecticut Supreme Court Answers the Question of Who is an “Employee” Under Unpaid Wage Law
Posted in Human Resources (HR) ComplianceThe Connecticut Supreme Court today addressed the issue of who is an "employee" under a provision of the state’s unpaid wage law that allows individuals to institute a civil action. (Conn. Gen. Stat. Sec. 31-72). That statute basically says that when wages aren’t paid under some other provisions (sections 31-71a to 31-71i), the employee may… Continue Reading
Connecticut Supreme Court to Hear Cases With All Seven Members
Posted in LitigationThe Connecticut Supreme Court late yesterday announced a sweeping change to its policy on hearing cases. Beginning next week, the Court will hear arguments and decide cases on an "en banc" basis — meaning that all seven members of the court (absent a disqualification or recusal) will now decide the cases. Previously, civil cases, such… Continue Reading
About Daniel Schwartz
Trusted advisor. Experienced employment law attorney. Bar leader. Award-winning author. Noted Speaker. "Legal Rebel". All can be said to be apt descriptions of Daniel Schwartz, a member of Pullman & Comley. More +
Follow Me on Twitter
Join the Discussion on Facebook
Subscribe to this blog via RSS
View My Linkedin Profile