November 02, 2017 | New York Law Journal
Does N.Y. Labor Law §193 Have 'Anything to Do With the Failure to Pay Wages'?In this Outside Counsel article, Adam J. Safer writes: For at least the last decade courts have wrestled with whether the “no deduction” language of §193 prohibits the complete failure to pay wages or more narrowly prohibits only more limited subtractions from wages other than those specified in the statute. Because of the statutory remedies available under the Labor Law, the resolution of this issue is not academic and has been heavily litigated.
By Adam J. Safer
10 minute read
April 05, 2017 | New York Law Journal
Forum Selection: An Important Tool for Non-CompetesAdam J. Safer writes: What happens when a New York company employs personnel in California? Are the employees subject to the law in New York, which enforces reasonable employee agreements not to compete, or the law in California, which does not? The answer is surprisingly uncertain.
By Adam J. Safer
20 minute read
February 13, 2014 | New York Law Journal
Post-Employment Restrictions: 35 Years of UncertaintyAdam J. Safer, a member of Miller & Wrubel, writes: Can an employer in New York terminate one of its employees without cause, for example by layoff or firing, and still enforce contractual restrictions preventing that employee from competing against it? With cryptic Court of Appeals decisions and inconsistent answers from the Appellate Division and New York federal courts, the answer is: it depends.
By Adam J. Safer
11 minute read
June 05, 2007 | New York Law Journal
Absolute Immunity for U-5 StatementsAdam J. Safer, a member of Miller & Wrubel, writes that it is clear that the holding in Rosenberg is intended to encourage employers to be more candid in their U-5 statements. Nevertheless, some lawyers have questioned whether the ruling will give employers carte blanche to write false, negative information about former employees in order to blackball their careers.
By Adam J. Safer
11 minute read
October 19, 2006 | New York Law Journal
N.Y.: Absolute or Qualified Privilege for U-5 Statements?Adam J. Safer, a member of Miller & Wrubel PC, writes that the Court of Appeals, as it decides whether the statements an NASD or NYSE member firm makes on an obligatory employee termination form are subject to absolute or qualified privilege, should consider whether a qualified privilege will have any affect on protecting the public from problem representatives. In the final analysis, the most important protection the privilege provides is not of the brokerage firms, but of investors.
By Adam J. Safer
12 minute read
Trending Stories