Main Menu
Posts from July 2017.

On July 6, 2017, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals became the latest circuit to weigh in on whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) protects employees from discrimination based on sexual orientation. The court had previously issued a ruling in Evans v. Georgia Regional Hosp, et. al., which held that Title VII did not protect employees from sexual orientation discrimination. The plaintiff petitioned the court for a rehearing; her petition was denied on July 6. Denying the request for a rehearing renders the earlier decision binding, so the Eleventh Circuit interprets Title VII to not protect employees from sexual orientation discrimination. The denial for a rehearing also inches the issue closer to Supreme Court review.

On June 9, 2017, the Kentucky Court of Appeals in Wolfe v. Young rendered a significant decision in a probate case by reversing a district court decision and reinstating our client as executor of his father’s estate. The decision was significant for probate law in Kentucky because it clearly distinguished the standard necessary to remove an executor of an estate from the lower standard that applies to the removal of an administrator of an estate. 

Most business financing is either debt or equity. A third option is "royalty financing" or “revenue-based financing” where the debtor obtains a loan and pays back the lender with a certain percentage of revenue rather than obtaining a traditional loan to be paid on a set schedule or selling equity interest. Such agreements have traditionally been used in entertainment, mining, oil & gas, and pharmaceutical companies, where a large, consistent stream of revenue is expected quickly. Now this financing structure is being used more frequently by start-ups during the early stages of development.

Posted in General

On June 22, 2017, the United States Supreme Court held in Maslenjak v. United States that naturalized U.S. citizens cannot have their citizenship revoked for making false statements to immigration officials if the misstatement did not factor into the decision to grant naturalization.  The ruling complicates the requirements for revocation of citizenship and will undoubtedly prompt both naturalized citizens and applicants to reexamine their applications to ensure proper procedures.

The United States Department of Labor (DOL) recently reinstated the Wage and Hour Division opinion letter process, which ended about seven years ago. DOL opinion letters allow either employers or employees to ask the DOL whether specific practices comply with laws under its jurisdiction.



Recent Posts




Back to Page