Sign up for environmental & land use e-alerts from Gunster

We have all been closely following Florida’s numeric nutrient criteria situation. As someone interested in this topic, and other environmental and land use issues in the state, I thought you might be interested to know more.





Supreme Court gives employers avenue to defend ever-increasing retaliation claims

The Supreme Court’s decision is great news for employers. This decision will help prevent employees who foresee they will be fired from making unfounded claims of discrimination in an effort to set up a retaliation claim. Employers should continue to document employee performance because with the heightened “but-for” standard in Nassar, employers who are able to articulate and support legitimate business reasons for termination may be able to escape liability by demonstrating that retaliation was not the “but-for” cause for the action.


Victory for employers: the Supreme Court limits employer liability in harassment cases

In Vance v. Ball State University, Maetta Vance (“Ms. Vance”), an African-American woman, sued her employer and alleged she was subjected to a unlawful harassment and a racially hostile work environment in violation of Title VII. The parties disputed whether the alleged harasser was a “supervisor” under the law. This is an important distinction because under Title VII an employer’s liability for workplace harassment depends on the harasser’s status as a “co-worker” or “supervisor.”


FinCEN issues ruling on Armored Car Service Transactions

The Ruling, prompted by practical issues raised by financial institutions concerning compliance with FinCEN’s prior ruling (“FIN-2009-R002”), “Treatment of Deposits by Armored Cars for Currency Transaction Report (CTR) Purposes,” attempts to mitigate some of the problems the institutions were having in filing complete and timely CTRs.





Close


Find a Professional

by Name


by Practice/Office