North America


Notable legal work:


for analysis of legal trends in employment and whistleblower law. In the past year, media outlets have quoted or interviewed TELG attorneys in more than 50 articles and news stories.


In addition, our attorneys have written legal commentary and analysis published in Westlaw Journal on Employment, The Employment Law Strategist, and the Sarbanes-Oxley Compliance Journal.


Attorneys at The Employment Law Group® law firm write frequently about cutting edge legal issues affecting whistleblowers and employees in general, including authoring the Whistleblower Law Blog that is featured on law.com. The Employment Law Group® law firm attorneys have published notable articles in 2010 and 2011 in West Publishing, Thomson Reuters, BNA, Law360, and The National Law Journal among others. These works include:


• Health Care Law Expands False Claims Act Liability Under Anti-Kickback Statute


• The Eighth Circuit Differentiates Between Political Discrimination and Retaliation


• More Protection for Whistleblowers, Department of Labor, Administrative Review Board 2011 Year in Review


• New Laws Expand Workers’ Rights


• The Supreme Court Finds Religion, A Look at Hosanna-Tabor


• Recent Developments in Qui Tam Litigation” The Rocket Docket News


The Employment Law Group® law firm’s cases have helped establish the vanguard of employment and whistleblower law.


For instance, in Stone v. Instrumentation Laboratory Co., TELG established precedent in a case before the Fourth Circuit, which held that Sarbanes-Oxley whistleblowers have a right to de novo review in federal court at any time after a case has been pending before the DOL for 180 days and be- fore a final judgment.


In Inman v. Klockner-Pentaplast, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court’s granting of a motion for summary judgment after TELG argued that a company’s efforts to create a younger image constituted age discrimination under the ADEA


In Smith v. Duke Energy, TELG successfully obtained a favorable decision from the U.S. Department of Labor’s Administrative Review Board (ARB) allowing the case of a nuclear power plant whistleblower to proceed to trial. This decision was significant for affirming that when an employer admits taking adverse action against an employee because of the employee’s protected activity, it is sufficient to demonstrate causation without further analysis.


In the past year, our attorneys filed amicus curiae briefs in support of broad protections for whistleblowers in cases such as Johnson v. Siemens Building Tech., Inc. – where the ARB held that favorable amendments clarify The Sarbanes Oxley Act - and Villanueva v. Core Labs. NV – where we argued that whistleblowers overseas should be covered under The Sarbanes Oxley Act.


Areas of Expertise • Whistleblower Law


• Employment Law • Executive Compensation


In the past year, our attorneys filed amicus curiae briefs in


support of broad protections for whistleblowers in cases


such as Johnson v. Siemens Building Tech., Inc. – where


the ARB held that favorable amendments clarify The Sarbanes Oxley Act - and


Villanueva v. Core Labs. NV – where we argued that whistleblowers overseas


should be covered under The Sarbanes Oxley Act.


Contact: Phone: 1-888-603-0983


Email: inquiry@employmentlawgroup.com


Lawyer Monthly Legal Awards 2012


69


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134