In Kiernan v. AAA Mechanical, Inc., No. 10-4421 (MLC), 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90655, (D.N.J. June 29, 2012), the plaintiff sued her employer for overtime compensation under the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law shortly after the New Jersey Department of Labor (NJDOL) conducted an investigation on her behalf and determined the employer was in violation of the law. Although the employer requested a hearing to contest the NJDOL’s finding, the NJDOL terminated the administrative proceeding without holding a hearing when the plaintiff filed the lawsuit. Despite the lack of a hearing below, the plaintiff argued that the NJDOL’s finding mandated a ruling in her favor in the lawsuit. The court rejected that position, holding that because the NJDOL’s conclusions were subject to further review (including the hearing), they did not constitute a final and binding determination on the merits of the plaintiff’s overtime claim.
The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which was signed into law on March 27, 2020, contains several provisions—some mandatory and some optional—that affect employer-sponsored group health plans.
The Second Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation in Mexico recently issued guidance establishing that outsourcing does not violate the constitutional principles of legal certainty and freedom.
In a recent, unpublished opinion Myres v. San Francisco Housing Authority, a California Court of Appeal reversed a trial court’s order reducing the amount of costs a plaintiff had claimed as a result of limited success at trial.