The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Has Issued a Critical Ruling for Franchisors Everywhere
On March 24, 2022, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) issued its highly anticipated ruling on a certified question in Patel v. 7-Eleven, Inc. (Docket No. 20-1999). On December 13, 2021, we wrote about looming implications for franchisors as the federal trial court’s concern focused on a perceived conflict in two laws: first, the Massachusetts Independent […]
Chuck Seyfarth Named ‘Stand-Out Lawyer’ By Thomson Reuters
O’Hagan Meyer Partner Chuck Seyfarth has been recognized as a “Stand-Out Lawyer”
by Thomson Reuters. Thomson Reuters surveyed more than 2,000 senior in-house counsel
in large organizations seeking nominations for the most outstanding lawyers that client has worked with in the last three years. Those recognized are noted for their high quality of work, business and commercial savvy, and ability to turn legal advice into practical solutions.
Superior Court Decision Provides Roadmap for Protecting Trade Secret Information Provided to State Agencies
Companies in regulated industries are often required to submit information to state agencies, and sometimes those submissions will include commercially sensitive information considered to be proprietary and trade secret. Legitimate concerns exist about maintaining the trade secret status of information after it is in the hands of a state agency, particularly considering public records laws […]
#MeToo Legislation in Massachusetts Has Stalled, But Massachusetts Employers Must Still Be Cautious When Settling Sexual Harassment and Other Discrimination Claims
In Massachusetts, legislation pending in the wake of the #MeToo movement has consistently stalled, and it is unclear why. However, if legislation similar to past efforts is pressed in the coming year, employers must take caution. February 19, 2022 marked the 1-year anniversary of the introduction of Senate Bills S-1020 and S-1021, legislation pending in […]
Congratulations to OM’s Newest Partners!
Please join us in congratulating our newest partners at O’Hagan Meyer! We are excited that Eileen Geller, J. Brandon Sieg, Sean Rohan, Johnny Antwiler, Lucas Sun, Andrea Rosenkranz, and Ryan Benson are continuing to grow with us.
A Critical Ruling for Franchisors Everywhere Looms in Massachusetts
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“MASJC”) heard oral argument on December 8, 2021 in a case of substantial importance to franchise owners.
CMS Vaccine Mandate for Healthcare Workers Blocked Nationwide by Louisiana Federal District Court
On November 30, 2021, a federal judge in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana placed a nationwide preliminary injunction on the enforcement and implementation of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ (“CMS”) COVID-19 vaccination mandate applicable to healthcare workers (“CMS Vaccine Mandate” or “Mandate”).
Navigating The New OSHA Vaccine Mandate While the Fifth Circuit Pumps the Brakes: What’s Next?
On November 4, 2021, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) issued the long-awaited emergency temporary standard (“ETS”), which provides a roadmap to the Biden Administration’s private sector vaccine mandate. Specifically, the ETS requires large employers—those with 100 or more employees— to either mandate COVID-19 vaccinations for their employees or require COVID-19 vaccinations along with an option for unvaccinated employees to receive weekly testing and wear a mask in lieu of being vaccinated.
O’Hagan Meyer Builds Labor & Employment and Commercial Litigation Teams in Philadelphia and Wilmington
O’Hagan Meyer is expanding its Labor & Employment and Commercial & Business Litigation practice in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware with the addition of new partners Jackie Gallagher and Kevin Golden, senior associate Michon Crawford and legal assistant Amy Haag in our Philadelphia office and with Of Counsel Steve Dargitz joining our Wilmington, Delaware office.
Northern District of California Requires Particularized Identification of Trade Secrets in Breach of Contract Case
California trade secret litigators are familiar with the requirement that plaintiffs alleging trade secret misappropriation must identify the alleged trade secrets with particularity before discovery begins. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California recently applied the identification requirement to a case which did not arise under the CUTSA.