I. Background
On June 6, 2014, in Foglia v. Renal Ventures Management, LLC the Third Circuit revived a dismissed False Claims Act (“FCA”) lawsuit, holding that the New Jersey District Court applied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b) too rigorously when granting Renal’s 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. Under Rule 9(b), an FCA whistleblower must allege “with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake.”
By Marisa S. Ratinoff and Amy B. Messigian
One of the main battlegrounds between employers and employees relates to the ability of employers to preclude class actions by way of arbitration agreements containing class action waivers. In California, the seminal case of Gentry v. Superior Court (“Gentry”) has had the practical effect of invalidating class action waivers in employment arbitration agreements since 2007. Gentry held that an employment class action waiver was unenforceable as a matter of California public policy if the class action waiver would “undermine the vindication of the employees’ unwaivable statutory rights” under the Labor Code. Thus, California hospitality employers and national hospitality employers with a business presence in California have found it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to enforce class action waivers in their employment arbitration agreements over the past seven years and have seen scores of California wage and hour cases proceed in court under the harsh hand of Gentry.
Beginning July 1, 2014, a new federal income tax law will come into effect that will greatly increase the administrative burden for many companies. If your business makes payments to foreigncompanies or if you are a foreign company that receives paymentsfrom U.S. companies, this new tax law may apply to you. It is ashame that the new tax law is written so broadly and can poten-tially apply to so many companies. The new tax law is also riddledwith exemptions that can only be claimed by meeting numerouscompliance requirements. Failure to comply with this new tax law will be a very expensive tax cost for your business in the form of 30% additional tax. More…
By Marisa S. Ratinoff and Amy B. Messigian
One of the main battlegrounds between employers and employees relates to the ability of employers to preclude class actions by way of arbitration agreements containing class action waivers. In California, the seminal case of Gentry v. Superior Court (“Gentry”) has had the practical effect of invalidating class action waivers in employment arbitration agreements since 2007. Gentry held that an employment class action waiver was unenforceable as a matter of California public policy if the class action waiver would “undermine the vindication of the employees’ unwaivable statutory rights” under the Labor Code. Thus, California hospitality employers and national hospitality employers with a business presence in California have found it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to enforce class action waivers in their employment arbitration agreements over the past seven years and have seen scores of California wage and hour cases proceed in court under the harsh hand of Gentry.
Connect with ILN
Firm of the Month
ILN Members Twitter Feed