Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Lately, there is never a dull moment at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Recent NLRB decisions have rewritten the labor law map in a variety of ways, but nowhere more significantly than in the areas of franchising and outsourcing. With the decision in Browning-Ferris Industries of California, which dealt with a temporary staffing agency (Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc. d/b/a BFI Newby Island Recyclery and FRR-II LLC d/b/a Leadpoint Business Services and Sanitary Truck Drivers and Helpers Local 350, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Case No. 32-RC-109684) and, more recently, in a decision by the NLRB's general counsel involving McDonald's USA, LLC (McDonald's USA and Fast Food Workers Committee and Service Employees International Union, CTW, CLC, Case No. 02-CA-093893), the definition of a “joint employer” has grown exponentially broader. This portends a vast expansion of employer liability on a joint employer theory in almost every area of law imaginable from tort to employment discrimination litigation.
McDonald's USA
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.