Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Firm/Organization: Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Blogs: ADA Title III, BioLoquitur, California Peculiarities Employment Law Blog, Consumer Class Defense Blog, EEOC Year-End Countdown, Employer Labor Relations, ERISA & Employee Benefits Litigation Blog, Trading Secrets, Wage & Hour Litigation Blog, Workplace Class Action Blog, Workplace Safety and Environmental Law Alert Blog

Latest Articles

Workplace Class Action Blog

Copy-Cat Class Actions Meet Copy-Cat Legislation: Illinois’ BIPA Spurs New Biometric Privacy Legislation Across The Nation

By Seyfarth Shaw LLP on July 11, 2019

By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr., Thomas E. Ahlering and Andrew R. Cockroft Seyfarth Synopsis: While most employers are likely familiar with the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”), they should know that Illinois is not the only state with a biometric privacy law and many other states are not far behind from joining that group. In addition to states with existing biometric privacy laws (Illinois, Texas, and Washington), various state legislatures are considering similar…

Workplace Safety and Environmental Law Alert Blog

Supreme Court Issues Decision Significantly Expanding the Scope of FOIA’s Confidentiality Exemption

By Seyfarth Shaw LLP on July 10, 2019

By Andrew S. Boutros, Michael D. Wexler, Alex Meier, Daniel P. Hart, Robert B. Milligan Seyfarth Synopsis: On June 24, 2019, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media and resolved fractured circuit splits about the parameters for when the government may withhold information from a Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) request based on responsive information being confidential or a trade secret. Earlier this year,…

Workplace Safety and Environmental Law Alert Blog

Illinois Supreme Court Affirms Pollution Control Board’s Clean Construction or Demolition Debris Rules, and Articulates Guidelines for Determining if Agency Action is Arbitrary or Capricious

By Seyfarth Shaw LLP on July 3, 2019

By Andrew H. Perellis, Jeryl L. Olson, Patrick D. Joyce, and Craig B. Simonsen Seyfarth Synopsis: The Illinois Supreme Court recently affirmed that the Illinois Pollution Control Board’s clean construction or demolition debris (CCDD) rules were not arbitrary and capricious. County of Will v. Pollution Control Board, Docket Nos. 122798 and 122813 (June 20, 2019). In 2011, following a 2010 legislative directive, Pub. Act 96-1416 (eff. July 30, 2010), the Illinois…

Workplace Class Action Blog

Biometric Privacy Class Actions By The Numbers: Analyzing Illinois’ Hottest Class Action Trend

By Seyfarth Shaw LLP on June 28, 2019

By: Gerald L. Maatman, Jr., Thomas E. Ahlering, and Alex W. Karasik Seyfarth Synopsis: Over the last few years, Illinois companies have quickly become aware of the risks associated with the state’s unique biometric privacy law. Originally passed in 2008, the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”) made Illinois the first state to enact a policy governing the collection and storage of biometric data resulting in a surge of class action lawsuits filed by…

Workplace Safety and Environmental Law Alert Blog

High Times Continue – Illinois Enacts Recreational Cannabis Law

By Seyfarth Shaw LLP on June 28, 2019

By Adam R. Young, Michael L. DeMarino, Jennifer L. Mora, and Craig B. Simonsen Seyfarth Synopsis: Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker signed the new recreational cannabis bill, which contains extensive provisions regarding the extent of an employer’s right to ban and otherwise discipline employees for cannabis use. The legislation takes effect on Jan. 1, 2020. Across the country, states are moving to legalize medical and recreational cannabis. In states that have legalized recreational…

Workplace Safety and Environmental Law Alert Blog

Supreme Court Upholds “Auer” Doctrine of Deferring to Agency’s Interpretation of its Own Ambiguous Regulation, While Imposing Limitations of When Deference is Triggered

By Seyfarth Shaw LLP on June 27, 2019

By Andrew H. Perellis, Joshua M. Henderson, Patrick D. Joyce, and Craig B. Simonsen Seyfarth Synopsis: The U.S. Supreme Court upheld this week a key component of administrative law that tells judges to defer to an executive agency’s interpretation of its own ambiguous regulation. Kisor v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs, No. 18-15 (US June 26, 2019). The case challenged so-called “Auer” or “Seminole Rock” deference. Auer deference has recently been criticized…

Workplace Class Action Blog

What Employers Can Expect With The EEOC

By Seyfarth Shaw LLP on June 21, 2019

Seyfarth Synopsis: As we approach the latter portion of the fiscal year, employers are beginning to see a significant spike in EEOC case filings over the last month or so, bringing the EEOC more in line with its relative aggressiveness during the previous couple of fiscal years. This increase in case filings comes on the heels of the May 8th Senate confirmation of the new EEOC Chair, Janet Dhillon. In today’s video, Partner Jerry Maatman…

Workplace Class Action Blog

Conditional Certification Granted In ADEA Collective Action On Behalf Of All Chattanooga Volkswagen Employees Aged 50 And Over

By Seyfarth Shaw LLP on June 15, 2019

By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. and Matthew Gagnon Seyfarth Synopsis: On June 11, 2019, in an age discrimination lawsuit, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee once again demonstrated how the lenient standard that is so often applied at the conditional certification stage of a collective action brought under the procedural rules of the Fair Labor Standards Act. In Manlove v. Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft, No. 18-CV-145 (E.D. Tenn. June 11, 2019), the…

Workplace Safety and Environmental Law Alert Blog

Half Baked — Illinois Legislature Includes Some Employer Protections in New Recreational Cannabis Law, But Creates Potential Liabilities

By Seyfarth Shaw LLP on June 13, 2019

By Adam R. Young, Michael L. DeMarino, and Jennifer L. Mora Seyfarth Synopsis: Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker is expected to sign a new recreational cannabis bill, which contains extensive provisions regarding the extent of an employer’s right to ban and otherwise discipline employees for cannabis use. Across the country, states are moving to legalize medical and recreational cannabis. In states that legalize recreational cannabis, employers and drug testing services have seen significant increases…

Workplace Class Action Blog

Ninth Circuit Rules That Varying State Laws Do Not Defeat Predominance Requirement In Class Action Settlement Context

By Seyfarth Shaw LLP on June 10, 2019

By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr., Esther Slater McDonald, and Michael L. DeMarino Seyfarth Synopsis: Satisfying Rule 23(b)(3)’s predominance requirement is undoubtedly a challenge when it comes to a nationwide class. Among the many issues that arise is the extent to which varying state laws can impact whether questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members. In In Re Hyundai & Kia Fuel Econ. Litig.,…

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Copy-Cat Class Actions Meet Copy-Cat Legislation: Illinois’ BIPA Spurs New Biometric Privacy Legislation Across The Nation

Supreme Court Issues Decision Significantly Expanding the Scope of FOIA’s Confidentiality Exemption

Illinois Supreme Court Affirms Pollution Control Board’s Clean Construction or Demolition Debris Rules, and Articulates Guidelines for Determining if Agency Action is Arbitrary or Capricious

Biometric Privacy Class Actions By The Numbers: Analyzing Illinois’ Hottest Class Action Trend

High Times Continue – Illinois Enacts Recreational Cannabis Law

Supreme Court Upholds “Auer” Doctrine of Deferring to Agency’s Interpretation of its Own Ambiguous Regulation, While Imposing Limitations of When Deference is Triggered

What Employers Can Expect With The EEOC

Conditional Certification Granted In ADEA Collective Action On Behalf Of All Chattanooga Volkswagen Employees Aged 50 And Over

Half Baked — Illinois Legislature Includes Some Employer Protections in New Recreational Cannabis Law, But Creates Potential Liabilities

Ninth Circuit Rules That Varying State Laws Do Not Defeat Predominance Requirement In Class Action Settlement Context

Company

Support

New to the Network