Top Stories

Veena Iyer Named as 2019 LCLD Fellow

Veena, a labor and employment attorney at NJL, is an active member of several professional and community associations. She’s earned leadership roles on Minnesota’s Asian Pacific American Bar Association (MNAPABA) and Minnesota Women Lawyers. Veena also chairs the firm’s Diversity & Inclusion Working Group. In 2018, Veena was honored for her D&I work by both Minnesota Lawyer (Diversity & Inclusion honoree) and Minnesota Women Lawyers (Service to MWL Award). More >

Illinois Jury Awards FELA Plaintiff Less Than 1% of Ask

Nilan Johnson Lewis’ Christy Mennen, along with attorneys Ray Groble and Matt Hammer from Daley Mohan Groble in Chicago, prevailed in Velasco v. Canadian Pacific Railway for client Canadian Pacific after a two-week long district court jury trial in Cook County, Ill. The case stemmed from an incident in February 2015 when the plaintiff slipped and […] More >

How Lawyers Can Act Ethically When it Comes to Social Media

Although most attorneys realize the law is a noble profession, there have always been those who compromise its integrity – sometimes capitalizing on or misleading others in times of misfortune. Legal ethics rules provide some guidance on how lawyers practice or market their services. However, new forms of communication and social media present evolving ethical challenges. More >

Appellate Court Rules that Age Bias Disparate Impact Theory Pertains to Employees, Not Applicants

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on January 23, 2019, that assertions of age discrimination arising from facially neutral hiring policies can be brought only by a company’s employees, not by job applicants. In Kleber v. CareFusion Corporation, the court agreed with recent rulings by other courts – most recently the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Villareal v. R.J. Tobacco Co. – holding that under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), only employees can state a claim that a company’s actions or policies resulted in an unlawful “disparate impact” due to age. More >

Minnesota Skiers and Snowboarders Now Liable for Injuries on the Slopes; Are Other Sports Next?

On January 23, the Minnesota Supreme Court issued a decision that impacts the assumption of risk for skiers and snowboarders within recreational areas. Since the early 19th century, Minnesota has recognized a doctrine about who is responsible for protecting against harm associated with activities that have well-known risks. The “doctrine of implied primary assumption” of risk states that when a person enters into an activity that has well-known risks that are either expressed or implied, the individual assumes the risks associated with the activity. However, the Minnesota Supreme Court decision in Soderberg v. Anderson held that collisions with other skiers or snowboarders is not a risk of the sport that participants impliedly assume. More >

“Freedom to Compete Act” Aims to Wipe Out Most Non-Compete Agreements

In reaction to the recent proliferation of non-compete agreements, courts and legislatures are increasingly trying to find ways to limit their use. The latest attempt is at the federal congressional level. This week, Florida Senator Marco Rubio introduced the “Freedom to Compete Act” aimed at prohibiting non-compete agreements for lower wage workers. The Act would amend the Fair Labor Standards Act to ban non-competes for most non-exempt workers. More >