Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
442 results for '* topic:"Employment Litigation"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2023-11-13
Practice Area: Employment Litigation
Industry: Health Care
Court: Commonwealth Court
Judge: Judge Jubelirer
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 302 C.D. 2022
Board properly upheld Workers' Compensation Judge's decision reinstating claimant's benefits as of the date of the reinstatement petition, rather than the date of the original impairment rating evaluation, court's statements in Dana Holding Corp. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Bd., 232 A.3d 629, regarding the availability of an equitable balancing test and retroactive application of Protz v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Bd., 161 A.3d 827 in extraordinary cases did not require reversal of board's decision and board properly applied pr
Publication Date: 2023-10-23
Practice Area: Employment Litigation
Industry: State and Local Government
Court: Commonwealth Court
Judge: Judge McCullough
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 696 C.D. 2022
Grievance arbitration was justified in finding that borough lacked just cause to terminate police officer after it violated internal affairs regulations by relying on matters not considered by the review board to justify terminating officer. Order of the trial court affirmed.
Publication Date: 2023-10-23
Practice Area: Employment Litigation
Industry: Education
Court: Commonwealth Court
Judge: Judge Leadbetter
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 1301 C.D. 2021
Unemployment Compensation Board of Review erred in denying claimant's application for unemployment compensation benefits where the board's factual findings were unsupported by the uncontroverted facts in the record. Order of the UCBR reversed.
Publication Date: 2023-10-23
Practice Area: Employment Litigation
Industry: Education
Court: Commonwealth Court
Judge: Judge Leadbetter
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 336 C.D. 2022
Claimant petitioned pro se from respondent Unemployment Compensation Board of Review's decision affirming as modified a referee's decision denying benefits for a four-week period in 2020. The court vacated and remanded for further proceedings where the Board's findings of fact were ambiguous as to claimant's status as a per diem or long-term substitute teacher, which in turn informed the question whether respondent's most recent employment offer represented a substantial reduction in wages and hours.
Publication Date: 2023-10-02
Practice Area: Employment Litigation
Industry:
Court: Commonwealth Court
Judge: Judge Wojcik
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 339 M.D. 2022
Petitioners asserted the 2017 amendment to the state employees retirement code was unconstitutional under art. V, §§1 and 16(a) of the Pennsylvania constitution and court found it was impossible to calculate an annuity of a defined-contribution retirement plan because it depended on individual choices and future market performance, the amendment did not violate art. V, §16(a) because the changes applied generally to all salaried officers of the commonwealth and petitioners did not demonstrate the 2017 plan was unconstitutional either
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Shari L. Klevens, Alanna G. Clair
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2023-09-25
Practice Area: Employment Litigation
Industry: Chemicals and Materials
Court: Commonwealth Court
Judge: Judge Covey
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 1468 C.D. 2022
Subsequent workers' compensation claim petition was barred by res judicata/collateral estoppel where the petition alleged disability beginning on the date of a prior work accident that employee had been adjudicated in a prior petition to have recovered from. Order of the Workers' Compensation Appeal Board affirmed.
Publication Date: 2023-09-25
Practice Area: Employment Litigation
Industry: Manufacturing | State and Local Government
Court: Commonwealth Court
Judge: Judge Covey
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 559 C.D. 2022
Employer petitioned for review of respondent's remand order reversing a referee's decision and finding claimant eligible for unemployment compensation benefits. The court vacated and remanded to allow employer to proffer rebuttal evidence on claimant's assertion she was discharged not for willful misconduct, but in retaliation for complaints of sexual harassment by employer's president.
Publication Date: 2023-09-18
Practice Area: Employment Litigation
Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Smith
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-4195
Defendant defined contribution retirement plan's committee did not breach its duty of prudence under ERISA with regard to plan's investment funds because committee had in place an objectively prudent process for monitoring and managing the investment funds and record keeping fees, the investment funds were objectively prudent and its recordkeeping fees and choice of a new recordkeeper were objectively prudent. Judgment for defendant.
Publication Date: 2023-09-18
Practice Area: Employment Litigation
Industry: Health Care
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Middle
Judge: District Judge Kane
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 1:23-cv-00643
Defendant moved to dismiss plaintiff's employment discrimination complaint for failure to adhere to the pleading standards required under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The court denied the motion where plaintiff's complaint, while containing technical violations of the rules, provided notice of her claims and the grounds upon which they rested.
Publication Date: 2023-09-11
Practice Area: Employment Litigation
Industry: State and Local Government
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Western
Judge: District Judge Baxter
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-278 Erie
Defendant moved to dismiss plaintiff police officer's Fair Labor Standards Act claim for unpaid overtime incurred while caring for his K-9 dog that lived with him and court found the claim was not barred by the "reasonable agreement" exception to the FLSA recognized in Krause v. Manalapan Twp., 486 Fed. Appx. 310, but plaintiff's unjust enrichment and overtime claims failed for lack of specificity. Motion granted in part and denied in part.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read