Seyfarth Shaw releases annual workplace class action lawsuit report
Seyfarth Shaw LLPs 10th annual Workplace Class Action Litigation Report reveals new challenges ahead for employers facing workplace class action litigation.
January 09, 2014 at 04:28 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Seyfarth Shaw LLP's 10th annual Workplace Class Action Litigation Report reveals new challenges ahead for employers facing workplace class action litigation. The survey conducted by international law firm Seyfarth is the “sole compendium” in the country dedicated exclusively to workplace class action lawsuits.
The 803-page report is available via ebook and serves as the “go-to” research and resource guide for business and their corporate counsel facing litigation.
This year, Seyfarth produced its largest report ever, analyzing 1,123 class action rulings on a circuit-by-circuit and state-by-state basis to capture “key themes” from last year and emerging litigation trends emerging for the coming year.
One of the biggest developments from 2013 report was Wal-Mart Stores, Inc v Dukes, which continues to have a wide-ranging impact all class actions lawsuits pending in both federal and state courts. In Dukes, according to bloomberglaw.com, the Supreme Court reversed an en banc ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that gave the green light to a sprawling nationwide class action that encompassed 1.5 million female Wal-Mart employees.
The report also focuses on the sharp importance of Rule 23, which outlines the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which details judges, attorneys, plaintiffs and defendants for conducting a class action lawsuit. The report also looks at:
- The increasing of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission focus on high-stakes, big-impact litigation
- An overall decrease in the number of discrimination cases being settled before trial
- A continuing rising tide of Wage & Hour cases
- Fallout from the Supreme Court's first Class Action Fairness Act ruling in Standard Fire Insurance Co v. Knowles
- Additions to the increasing number of rulings allowing employers to use arbitration agreements to manage class action risks
- Rapid strategic changes due to rulings like Comcast Corporation v. Behrends
“In the past two years, we have seen a combination of Supreme Court decisions help create a defensive barrier for employers in class action cases,” said Seyfarth's Gerald L. Maatman, Jr., co-chair of its Class Action Defense group and author of the Report. “Enough time has passed, however, that plaintiff lawyers have begun to breach this barrier with new theories and approaches and, combined with increasing and aggressive government enforcement litigation, employers may once again find themselves facing bet-the-company-type class actions in 2014.”
Divided into detailed chapters on leading class action settlements, federal law rulings, and state law rulings, the substantive areas examined by the Report include: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; EEOC pattern or practice cases; the Age Discrimination in Employment Act; the Fair Labor Standards Act; the Employee Retirement Income Security Act; state law rulings in employment law, wage and hour, and breach of contract cases; key CAFA rulings, and other class action rulings with significance to Rule 23 and/or workplace litigation.
Related reading:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllOld Laws, New Tricks: Lawyers Using Patchwork of Creative Legal Theories to Target New Tech
Lawsuit Against Amazon Could Reshape E-Commerce Landscape
King Kullen—the Nation's First Supermarket—Hires Outside Counsel as GC
Trending Stories
- 1Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 2Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 3Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 4Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250