Michael Starr

June 22, 2000 | Law.com

In 1998, the Supreme Court changed the legal landscape of liability for sexual harassment when it held in Ellerthand Faragherthat employers are vicariously liable for the harassing conduct of their supervisors, unless an employer qualifies for a new affirmative defense. Despite initial concerns that this standard might dramatically alter employer liability, the decisions since the Court's rulings have confirmed the principles that employment attorneys have been counseling for years.

By Michael Starr and Adam Blank

14 minute read

March 28, 2007 | National Law Journal

Nonrecruitment or anti-raiding covenants forbid former employees from enticing their erstwhile co-workers into leaving their employer to work for a competitor. Only a limited number of jurisdictions have addressed the validity of these covenants, and the conclusions range everywhere from absolute validity to near total prohibition.

By Michael Starr and Christine M. Wilson

8 minute read

January 01, 2007 | National Law Journal

A new kind of religious discrimination claim is coming from those who feel they have a religious obligation to affirm publicly in the workplace their religious beliefs, proselytize to others or expressly oppose what they believe to be the sinful behavior of their co-workers.

By Michael Starr and Christine M. Wilson

8 minute read

March 14, 2005 | National Law Journal

It is common knowledge that employers must accomodate employees with disabilities. Less well-known is that the ADA also protects people who are perceived to be disabled.

By Michael Starr and Megumi Sakae

8 minute read

January 21, 2008 | National Law Journal

On Dec. 3, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Sprint v. Mendelsohn, likely the most important employment law case the court will decide this term. At issue is whether a district court can permissibly exclude from an employment discrimination trial what is called "me, too" evidence � testimony by other employees of the same employer who, like the plaintiff, were allegedly adversely treated because of the same protected characteristic, but who worked in other areas and for different supervisors.

By Michael Starr and Christine M. Wilson

8 minute read

March 26, 2012 | New York Law Journal

Holland & Knight's Michael Starr and Katherine H. Marques write: It is sometimes said that, under New York's employee-choice doctrine, employers can never enforce anticompetition forfeitures and restrictive covenants if they terminate their employees involuntarily and without cause. That is a misstatement of the law.

By Michael Starr and Katherine H. Marques

18 minute read

May 11, 2006 | Law.com

Beyond the desire to do good or avoid legal liability for employment discrimination, a diverse work force is good business, attorneys Michael Starr and Adam J. Heft write. But unfortunately, attempting to achieve workplace diversity through ad hoc decisions that advance women or minorities, often made in the absence of, or without strict adherence to, a formal affirmative action plan, can spawn claims of illegal reverse discrimination. And such claims appear to be on the rise, Starr and Heft say.

By Michael Starr and Adam J. Heft

8 minute read

July 07, 2005 | Law.com

By Michael Starr and Adam J. Heft

8 minute read

October 10, 2005 | Law.com

As many employers are now painfully well aware, practically any employee grievance can sow the seeds for a claim of illegal retaliation. The gravamen of a retaliation claim is that the employer has taken some adverse employment action against an individual because he or she opposed illegal discrimination. Attorneys Michael Starr and Adam J. Heft take a look at some recent court decisions regarding retaliation claims.

By Michael Starr and Adam J. Heft

8 minute read

July 29, 2002 | New Jersey Law Journal

U.S. Supreme Court Year in Review

By Michael Starr and Adam J. Heft

9 minute read