Legal Insights

How Employers Can Avoid California Labor Code Section 925

Many non-California employers view the enactment of California Labor Code Section 925 as destroying any possibility of avoiding the state’s restrictive covenants laws for California-based employees. But there is hope! With creative legal counsel, employers can draft agreements that do not implicate the statute and avoid its application in litigation. More >

UPDATE: City of Minneapolis Passes $15 Minimum Wage

The Minneapolis City Council adopted a $15 minimum wage ordinance on Friday, June 30, 2017. Labor and Employment attorney Lisa Schmid has been following the ordinance closely and has updated a previous post with the changes voted on June 30. The passed ordinance contains the following provisions: A schedule of minimum wage increases that differs […] More >

City of Minneapolis Releases Draft Minimum Wage Ordinance

As expected, the Minneapolis City Council released its draft ordinance implementing a minimum wage increase. The draft ordinance includes extraterritorial application—meaning that it will apply to employers outside of Minneapolis if their employees work for a minimal amount of time in the City, a provision which will almost certainly face legal challenge—and no tip credit. More >

501(r) Audits Are Here: What You Need to Know

The Affordable Care Act imposed new requirements on tax-exempt hospitals under Section 501(r) of the Internal Revenue Code. Section 501(r) and its implementing regulations present a complex framework intended to promote “charitable” behavior by tax-exempt hospitals. By way of example, 501(r) requires a hospital to assess and address community health needs and to adopt billing and collection practices aimed at ensuring that patients who have a limited ability to pay for care are treated fairly. More >

New Minnesota Law Aims to Curtail Opportunistic Disability Lawsuits by Mandating 60-day Notice Period

The bill—which passed through the Legislature with strong bipartisan majorities and took effect on May 24, 2017—says that any attorney or person represented by an attorney can no longer bring a lawsuit alleging violations of the MHRA’s architectural accessibility requirements unless he or she first sends a notice to the business in question. More >