Class Actions, Employment Litigation, Fourth Circuit, Legislative Updates, MLB Litigation Brief, NC Courts, U.S. Senate

MLB Litigation Brief: 4th Circuit Hostile Work Enviro, Class Action Trends Cause Concern, Low-Wage Non-Competes & More

Litigation Brief Header


Our goal is to serve as a cutting-edge resource for companies operating in an increasingly globalized and regulated business environment. Moore & Van Allen’s MLB Litigation Brief is a complement to our Litigation Blog’s in-depth individual treatment of critical issues emerging in federal, North Carolina state, and international litigation, as well as in arbitration, regulatory enforcement, and related business practices. MLB Litigation Brief hits the highlights of recent developments, streamlining access to critical information for our readers. Subscribe to the MVA Litigation Blog via email or RSS to ensure that you receive MLB Litigation Brief, as well as our comprehensive posts. Please contact us if you have any questions regarding the materials covered.


Fourth Circuit

    • En Banc Fourth Circuit Ruled Hostile Work Environment Discrimination & Retaliation Claims Can be Based on Isolated Incident: Recognizing that it was a first for the court, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals held in Boyer-Liberto v. Fontainebleau Corporation, No. 13-1473 (4th Cir. May 7, 2015) that an isolated incident of racial discrimination can be severe enough to constitute a hostile work environment under Title VII, giving rise to the employee’s protection from retaliation for reporting the incident. The court clarified that its prior opinions were not meant to require more than one incident of harassment to maintain a hostile work environment claim, and explicitly overruled Jordan v. Alternative Resources Corp., 458 F.3d 332 (4th Cir. 2006) to the extent that it conflicts with Boyer-Liberto.

North Carolina

    • Date Motion to Amend Complaint is Filed is Key to Statute of Limitations Analysis: Judge Bledsoe of the North Carolina Business Court reiterated in Insight Health Corp. v. Marquis Diagnostic Imaging of NC, LLC, 2015 NCBC 50 (May 21, 2015) that the relevant date for determining whether a party was added to a lawsuit prior to the statute of limitations running is the date that a motion to amend is filed and not (a) the date that the court rules on the motion, (b) the date the actual amended complaint is filed, or (c) the date the summons is issued for the new party. Relying upon cases dating back to 1986, Judge Bledsoe rejected the defendant’s arguments to the contrary without a hearing on the matter.
    • New Commission Charged with Comprehensive Evaluation of State Justice System: Chief Justice Martin recently announced the creation of the North Carolina Commission on the Administration of Law and Justice, which will perform an in-depth evaluation of the state’s judicial system in order to provide guidance to the legislature on the system’s budgetary requirements by 2017. The Commission is co-chaired by five representatives from the legal and business communities and will incorporate the input of additional stakeholders in analyzing the following areas: criminal investigation and adjudication, civil justice, technology and its application to our courts, the future of legal services, and public trust and confidence. Additional information is available here.

On Capitol Hill

    • Non-Compete Agreements for Low-Wage Workers Target of Proposed Legislation: Several months ago, news circulated regarding the use of non-compete agreements in employment contracts of low-wage sandwich shop workers. These types of agreements have been criticized as preventing lower-wage employees from being able to advance in their industries due to the restrictions imposed against working for competing companies. Last week, several U.S. Senators introduced the Mobility and Opportunity for Vulnerable Employees Act, which seeks to prohibit employers from using non-compete agreements against employees earning less than $15 per hour, or the local minimum wage if it is higher. A fine of $5,000 per employee may be imposed if the Act is violated. With respect to higher-wage employees, the Act would require companies to disclose the non-compete requirement prior to hiring.

On Notice

    • Survey Says Increasing Number of Class Actions Most Important Litigation Trend: Norton Rose Fulbright recently released its global 2015 Litigation Trends Annual Survey, which compiles litigation trends and data gathered from 803 corporate counsel in 26 countries. Contract disputes (38%) and employment matters (37%) lead in the categories of litigation currently pending, with a large portion of respondents (39%) identifying regulatory/investigation matters as the primary type of dispute that causes their company concern. The increasing number of class actions was identified as “the most important issue or trend in litigation” that companies are facing.

Tony Lathrop

About Tony Lathrop

Tony Lathrop brings experience and a high level of analytical ability, professional credibility and creativity to handling litigation matters. He rigorously represents his clients' interests in a diverse range of claims and actions. A certified mediator, Mr. Lathrop has extensive experience representing business clients in mediation. His service to the legal profession in North Carolina has allowed him to develop relationships across the state that benefit the firm's clients.

Discussion

One thought on “MLB Litigation Brief: 4th Circuit Hostile Work Enviro, Class Action Trends Cause Concern, Low-Wage Non-Competes & More

  1. Really interesting cases here! I’ll be excited to see what these decisions mean in the long term. Thanks for sharing these!

    Posted by Jordan | July 27, 2015, 10:36 am

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

Welcome to the MVA Litigation Blog!

In an increasingly globalized and regulated business environment, companies are faced with ever-changing and complicated litigation and regulatory challenges. The Moore & Van Allen Litigation Blog provides cutting-edge information regarding developments in federal, North Carolina State, and international litigation, as well as in arbitration, regulatory enforcement, and related business practices.

Connect to Recent Authors

  • Tony Lathrop:  View Tony Lathrop's Bio View Tony Lathrop's LinkedIn profileFollow @TonyLathropLaw on Twitter

  • Subscribe to Blog Via Email

    Follow MVA

    Facebooktwitterlinkedinrss

    Blog Topics

    Archives


    Our Litigation Practice

    Headquartered in the banking and energy hub of Charlotte, North Carolina, Moore & Van Allen has assembled a team of litigators with the intellectual acuity, knowledge of complex commercial transactions, and breadth of experience necessary to successfully serve our clients in all aspects of sophisticated business litigation and white collar criminal defense.

    Guided by trial lawyers with years of substantial state, federal, and international experience, our team addresses the diverse challenges facing our clients, ranging from general commercial litigation and matters involving employment, antitrust, trust & estate, securities or corporate governance issues, to class actions, regulatory enforcement proceedings, and government & internal investigations.

    We represent large Fortune 500® corporations, as well as start-ups, in banking, securities, healthcare, manufacturing, construction, energy, and other industries. We work closely with our clients to develop strategies to meet their business needs, whether that includes taking a case to trial or appeal, arbitrating a case or finding an alternative means of resolution. Read More About Our Practice and Meet the MVA Litigation Team.

    Disclaimer

    No Attorney-Client Relationship Created by Use of this Website: Neither your receipt of information from this website, nor your use of this website to contact Moore & Van Allen or one of its attorneys creates an attorney-client relationship between you and Moore & Van Allen. As a matter of policy, Moore & Van Allen does not accept a new client without first investigating for possible conflicts of interests and obtaining a signed engagement letter. (Moore & Van Allen may, for example, already represent another party involved in your matter.) Accordingly, you should not use this website to provide confidential information about a legal matter of yours to Moore & Van Allen.


    No Legal Advice Intended: This website includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances. You should contact an attorney for advice on specific legal problems. (Read All)