Bankruptcy Lawyer, Albany Attorney - Randall E. Kehoe, Esq.

Roby v. McKesson Corp.
30 November 2009, 1:00 pm

(Cal., Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Injury And Tort Law, Labor & Employment Law, Remedies) In plaintiff's wrongful discharge, harassment and discrimination suit against her former employer and supervisor, court of appeal's judgment is reversed where: 1) the Court of Appeal erred in allocating the evidence between the harassment claim and the discrimination claim, and as such, basing on that allocation, it erred in finding insufficient evidence to support the harassment verdict; and 2) although the court of appeal was correct in holding that the $15 million punitive damages award exceeds the federal constitutional limit, it erred in concluding that in this case the appropriate limit is $2 million as, under the test set forth in State Farm, a one-to-one ratio between compensatory and punitive damages is the federal constitutional limit in this case.





Source: FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Labor Law

If you have a question concerning any legal matter, please give us a call at (518) 465-2211 or visit our main site at www.randallkehoelaw.com.

Costco Wholesale Corp. v. Sup. Ct.
30 November 2009, 1:00 pm

(Cal., Civil Procedure, Class Actions, Evidence, Labor & Employment Law) In a class action suit brought by employees against the Costco Wholesale Corporation alleging the corporation misclassified some of its managers as exempt employees and therefore failed to pay them overtime wages, trial court's directions ordering a referee to conduct an in camera review of an opinion letter sent by outside counsel to Costco and allowing the referee to redact the letter to conceal that portion he believed to be privileged, and ordering Costco to disclose the remainder to the opposing party is reversed as the trial court's directions and order violated the attorney-client privilege, as well as the statutory prohibition against requiring disclosure of information claimed to be subject to the attorney-client privilege in order to rule on a claim of privilege.





Source: FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Labor Law

If you have a question concerning any legal matter, please give us a call at (518) 465-2211 or visit our main site at www.randallkehoelaw.com.

Affri v. Basch
24 November 2009, 5:00 pm

(N.Y., Injury And Tort Law, Labor & Employment Law) In a tort action arising out of injuries sustained by plaintiff while working on defendants' property, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where defendants did not exercise sufficient direction and control over plaintiff's work to overcome the one or two-family dwelling exception found in Labor Law sections 240 and 241.





Source: FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Labor Law

If you have a question concerning any legal matter, please give us a call at (518) 465-2211 or visit our main site at www.randallkehoelaw.com.

Braden v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
25 November 2009, 5:00 pm

(U.S. 8th Cir., Civil Procedure, ERISA, Labor & Employment Law) In an ERISA action claiming that defendant benefit plan administrator (Wal-Mart) failed adequately to evaluate the investment options included in the plan, dismissal of the complaint is reversed where: 1) the district court erred by conflating the issue of plaintiff's Article III standing with his potential personal causes of action under ERISA; and 2) the district court erred by ignoring reasonable inferences supported by the facts alleged and drawing inferences in defendants' favor, faulting plaintiff for failing to plead facts tending to contradict those inferences.





Source: FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Labor Law

If you have a question concerning any legal matter, please give us a call at (518) 465-2211 or visit our main site at www.randallkehoelaw.com.

Medina v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.
25 November 2009, 5:00 pm

(U.S. 1st Cir., Administrative Law, Attorney's Fees, Civil Procedure, ERISA, Insurance Law, Labor & Employment Law) In plaintiff's ERISA suit against defendant alleging that it used an arbitrary and capricious procedure in terminating his short-term disability benefits and refusing to grant him long-term disability benefits, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) defendant did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff's claim for short-term disability benefits; 2) district court did not err in dismissing plaintiff's claim for long-term disability benefits as he had not exhausted his administrative remedies; 3) plaintiff's claim that defendant is liable for sanctions is rejected; and 4) district court did not err in not awarding plaintiff attorney's fees as he did not prevail on any of his substantive claims.





Source: FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Labor Law

If you have a question concerning any legal matter, please give us a call at (518) 465-2211 or visit our main site at www.randallkehoelaw.com.

Dorsey v. Office of Pers. Mgmt.
25 November 2009, 5:00 pm

(U.S. Fed. Cir., Administrative Law, Government Benefits, Government Law, Labor & Employment Law) Merit Systems Protection Board's denial of petitioner's request for a survival annuity benefit based on the federal service of her late spouse is affirmed as the Board's determination that petitioner's husband failed to elect a survivor annuity benefit during the two-year window provided for by statute is supported by substantial evidence.





Source: FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Labor Law

If you have a question concerning any legal matter, please give us a call at (518) 465-2211 or visit our main site at www.randallkehoelaw.com.

Musch v. Domtar Indus., Inc.
25 November 2009, 5:00 pm

(U.S. 7th Cir., Civil Procedure, Labor & Employment Law) In plaintiff's suit on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, seeking compensation for the time spent changing clothes and showering at the end of each work shift at defendant's paper mill, summary judgment in favor of defendant is affirmed where: 1) plaintiffs' daily post-shift activities are done under normal conditions and are merely postliminary non-compensable activities; and 2) the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff's motion to reconsider in concluding that plaintiff merely rehashed the arguments he had made at summary judgment and failed to present evidence of extraordinary and exceptional circumstances under Rule 60(b)(6).





Source: FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Labor Law

If you have a question concerning any legal matter, please give us a call at (518) 465-2211 or visit our main site at www.randallkehoelaw.com.

Becerril v. Pima County Assessor's Office
25 November 2009, 5:00 pm

(U.S. 9th Cir., Civil Rights, Health Law, Labor & Employment Law) In an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) action claiming that a county office discriminated against plaintiff-employee by reassigning her because of her disability and refusing to engage in the ADA's "interactive process" after she had requested a reasonable accommodation, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) there was no evidence that plaintiff's supervisor reassigned her because her coworkers in the public service section complained about accommodations she received for her disability; and 2) plaintiff did not raise a triable issue on whether her disability substantially limited her in speaking, eating, seeing, sleeping, and thinking and concentrating.





Source: FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Labor Law

If you have a question concerning any legal matter, please give us a call at (518) 465-2211 or visit our main site at www.randallkehoelaw.com.

Oddone v. Sup. Ct.
24 November 2009, 1:00 pm

(Cal. App., Health Law, Injury And Tort Law, Labor & Employment Law) In plaintiff's suit on behalf of her deceased husband against his former employer claiming that his brain tumor was caused by exposure to toxic chemicals while working for Technicolor, plaintiff's petition challenging an order sustaining defendant's demurrer to a claim that plaintiff was injured by exposure to toxic chemicals and vapors on her husband's clothing and person that he brought home is denied where Technicolor does not owe plaintiff a duty of due care, as plaintiff's attempts to state a cause of action fall short of the Rowland criteria.





Source: FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Labor Law

If you have a question concerning any legal matter, please give us a call at (518) 465-2211 or visit our main site at www.randallkehoelaw.com.

Ford v. Minteq Shapes & Serv., Inc.
24 November 2009, 5:00 pm

(U.S. 7th Cir., Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Evidence, Labor & Employment Law, Manufacturing) In plaintiff's Title VII case against his employer claiming racial harassment, wage discrimination, and retaliation, summary judgment for employer is affirmed where: 1) there is no genuine issues of fact with respect to the existence of racial harassment; 2) plaintiff failed to satisfy the fourth element regarding disparate wage treatment because he adduced no evidence that higher paid workers were similarly situated; and 3) plaintiff failed to present evidence that he suffered an adverse employment action because he engaged in an activity protected by Title VII.





Source: FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Labor Law

If you have a question concerning any legal matter, please give us a call at (518) 465-2211 or visit our main site at www.randallkehoelaw.com.