Happy Holidays to our loyal readers of the Workplace Class Action Blog!
Our elves are busy at work this holiday season in wrapping up the galley proofs of our start-of-the-year kick-off publication – Seyfarth Shaw’s Annual Workplace Class Action Litigation Report.
We anticipate going to press in the first two
By Alex S. Drummond and William Miles
The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, paper, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures,” and provides that no warrant shall issue with probable cause. In a recent decision in Bank of America v. Hilsa
By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. and Jennifer Riley
In the most recent application of the U.S. Supreme Court’s holding in Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011), the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey – in Bell, et al. v. Lockheed Martin Corp., Case No. 08-6292, 2011 U.S.
By Rebecca Bjork and Lynn Kappelman
The recent decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in NAACP, et al v. North Hudson Regional Fire & Rescue, Nos. 10-3965 & 10-3983, 2011 WL 6144188 (3d Cir. Dec, 12, 2011), demonstrates how employers facing disparate impact claims must have a laser-like focus
By Rebecca Bjork and Chris Palamountain
The Plaintiffs’ class action bar has made much of the retroactivity provisions of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, which provide that an unlawful employment practice occurs not only when a discriminatory decision is made, but also “each time wages, benefits, or other compensation is paid….” Pub.
By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. and David Ross
Virtually every class action pending in federal court has undergone a re-examination based on the U.S. Supreme Court’s holding in Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011). The issues arises either based on a defense motion to strike or decertify a class based on
By