One question that employers have been asking since the onset of the pandemic is whether they could be sued by employees who get sick as a result of being exposed to an infected coworker.
The Department of Justice (“DOJ”) has made clear that it is pursuing civil enforcement actions and criminal prosecution of individuals and entities exploiting the COVID-19 pandemic for their own gain, as seen in the U.S. Attorney General directing all U.S. Attorneys to prioritize these investigations and prosecutions.
A recent decision by a federal judge in New York could open a door to claims for benefits by furloughed employees under the Emergency Paid Sick Leave Act (“EPSLA”) of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”) and the Emergency Family and Medical Leave Expansion Act (“EFMLEA”).
Typically, an employees’ exclusive remedy for work-related injuries is through their state’s workers’ compensation system. As an example, suppose an employee suffers a work-related injury as a result of her employer’s negligence.
The global coronavirus pandemic has brought confusion and uncertainty to just about every aspect of life, but one thing remains constant: following a dramatic drop in stock price, an issuer’s public statements will be scrutinized, and securities litigation may follow.
In early June, federal agencies brought some of the first enforcement actions against COVID-19 securities fraudsters, involving over $100 million in fraudulent claims and profits, making good on their promise to investigate and prosecute those seeking to fraudulently capitalize on the COVID-19 crisis.
A board of directors’ vision and leadership becomes particularly vital during times of distress.
Class actions in the pork and cattle industry foreshadow probable antitrust enforcement and defense strategies against the backdrop of COVID-19, which has caused meat processing plant closures, severe disruptions to the supply chain of consumer meat, and an increase in prices at your local grocery store.
On April 1, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court decision holding that a qui tam relator in a False Claims Act (“FCA”) action failed to file its complaint alleging Small Business Administration (“SBA”) loan fraud within the required statute of limitations.