Gibbons Law Alert

Gibbons Law Alert Blog

The Third Circuit Goes Its Own Way on ADEA Disparate Impact Claims

On February 15, 2017

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) protects from discrimination of employees who are at least 40 years of age. Recently, in Karlo v. Pittsburgh Glass Works, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit departed company with three of its sister Circuits by holding that plaintiffs asserting a claim of “disparate impact” under the ADEA may establish a disparate impact with comparisons between subgroups of employees and need not show that a challenged employment practice has had an adverse impact on employees 40 years of age or older compared to its impact on employees under 40. Thus, the Court permitted to go forward with a disparate impact claim based on a comparison between employees at least 50 years of age with employees under 50. The decision will have a profound impact on employers’ assessments of their potential ADEA liability for disparate impact claims and on the way ADEA disparate impact claims are litigated in the Third Circuit. Background To establish a claim of disparate impact discrimination under the ADEA, a plaintiff must show, through statistical evidence, that the employers implemented a facially age-neutral employment practice that fell more harshly on the protected group. If this showing is made, the employer can defeat the claim by demonstrating that the practice in question is...

More on EPA’s New Recommendations on Sediment Cleanups

by Paul M. Hauge

Posted in Environmental and Green Issues

On February 15, 2017

Last month, we wrote about a new memorandum from the EPA’s Office of Land and Emergency Management that sets forth 11 recommendations for the agency’s regional offices on how to clean up contaminated sediments. Here we discuss some of those recommendations in greater detail. The EPA’s recommendations are shown below in bold text, followed by our comments and analysis. Recommendation 1: Consider early actions during the remedial investigation/feasibility study in site areas presenting high risks to help reduce risks quickly. Here, the EPA advises its regional offices not to wait until the sediments at a site are well characterized before taking steps to reduce serious risks. In many situations, the EPA can use its removal authority to reduce serious risks while other portions of the site are studied. Recommendation 2: Ensure adequate data collection during the remedial investigation/feasibility study to support the evaluation of alternatives. It’s never too early to plan ahead. From the very start of the process, the focus should be on collecting data that will support an eventual evaluation of remedial alternatives. Avoid “study for study’s sake.” Recommendation 3: Evaluate the risks associated with exposures to contaminated sediments, including submerged sediments. While the greatest risks at many sites likely involve ingestion of fish and shellfish, site managers should not ignore more direct pathways, such as...

The Power of New York’s Borrowing Statute

by Gibbons P.C.

Posted in General Litigation

On February 15, 2017

On October 11, 2016, the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, First Department, decided 2138747 Ontario, Inc. v. Samsung C&T Corp., et al., which serves as a reminder to attorneys that New York’s borrowing statute applies even where the parties agreed to a New York choice-of-law provision. The borrowing statute, CPLR 202, provides that, when a non-New York resident sues on a cause of action accruing outside New York, the complaint must be filed timely under the statute of limitations of both New York and the jurisdiction where the cause of action accrued. The statute’s underlying objective is to prevent forum shopping by nonresident plaintiffs. In Ontario, the plaintiff, a corporation formed under the law of Ontario, Canada, was a creditor of SkyPower Corporation, a bankrupt Canadian renewable energy developer. SkyPower’s bankruptcy trustee assigned to the plaintiff all of its claims against the defendants. The plaintiff then sought damages against the defendants for a breach of a nondisclosure and confidentiality agreement (NDA), which contained a broad New York choice-of-law provision. The plaintiff’s complaint was untimely under Ontario’s two-year statute of limitations but was timely under New York’s six-year statute of limitations. The trial court found that Ontario’s two-year statute of limitations applied and dismissed the case. The Appellate Division affirmed. Although the court found...

Latest Technology Survey of Lawyers Reveals Troubling Trends

by Gibbons P.C.

Posted in Technology Developments and Issues

On February 8, 2017

Recently, the American Bar Association released its annual technology survey, a comprehensive report that explores how attorneys are using technology. It revealed some troubling trends. The finding of most concern is that nearly half of the respondents indicated their belief that they were not ethically required to stay apprised of legal technology developments, or that they were unclear regarding their ethical duties. In fact, the ABA formally approved a change to Rule 1.1 of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct in 2012 that clarified that a lawyer’s ethical duty of competence requires knowledge of technology related to their practice. Since that time, approximately half of the states have adopted the revised rule, which provides: “Maintaining Competence To maintain the requisite knowledge and skill, a lawyer should keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice, including the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology, engage in continuing study and education and comply with all continuing legal education requirements to which the lawyer is subject.” Indeed, an attorney’s lack of familiarity with relevant technology may subject him/her to sanctions and ethical violations, even in a state that has not adopted the revised ABA Rule. For example, California’s Professional Responsibility Committee opined that an attorney’s e-discovery ignorance, which resulted in the deletion of relevant data and the...

Executive Order Spells Uncertainty for Pending EPA Rules

by Gibbons P.C.

Posted in Environmental and Green Issues

On February 8, 2017

On January 30, 2017, as promised during his campaign, President Trump signed an executive order requiring federal agencies to identify two regulations to be repealed for every new regulation that is created. The order comes on the heels of a January 20, 2017 memorandum from White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus directing agency heads to freeze new or pending regulations including those that had been finalized but not yet published in the Federal Register. The “one in, two out” rule and regulatory freeze spell uncertainty for regulations currently in the pipeline for adoption by the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), including the proposed financial assurances rules for the hardrock mining industry we have previously covered here. Other impacted EPA rule proposals include a stormwater general permit designed to reduce polluted runoff from construction sites and a rule which would include vapor intrusion as a method of evaluating contamination levels at potential Superfund sites. At present, it is unclear how the administration’s actions will ultimately impact any pending EPA regulations (or those of other federal agencies). The environmental attorneys at Gibbons P.C. will be closely monitoring any further executive action impacting proposed EPA rules and report on any important developments.

Philadelphia Adopts Wage Equity Ordinance

by Elizabeth Cowit

Posted in Wage and Hour

On February 6, 2017

On January 23, 2017, Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney signed the Wage Equity Bill into law. The new law, influenced by the Massachusetts pay equity law, makes it unlawful for Philadelphia employers and employment agencies to ask about an applicant’s wage and benefit history or to rely on such applicant’s wage history to determine future wages. The law also prevents employers from retaliating against any candidate who fails to respond to any wage inquiry. The law takes effect on May 23, 2017, and aims to address historic wage gaps which affect women and minorities, by prohibiting employers from basing compensation on a candidate’s wages at a previous employer, given the historical pay inequities between men and women and minorities. In its “finding” sections, the new law provides statistical examples of wage disparities and encourages employers to set salary offers based on the job responsibilities of the position sought, rather than prior wages. Nothing in the law prohibits an applicant from disclosing voluntarily his or her compensation history. And, employers may still ask a candidate about his/her compensation expectations. The law also requires employers to post fair practices notices, which will be made available by the Commission. Employers should carefully review their employment applications and related documents to ensure compliance by May 23, 2017. For answers to...

NYSDEC Announces Proposed Amendments to SEQRA Regulations

by Howard D. Geneslaw

Posted in Environmental and Green Issues

On February 6, 2017

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) recently announced proposed amendments to the regulations implementing the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”), 6 N.Y.C.R.R. Part 617. The amendments mark the first update to the SEQRA regulations in over 20 years. According to a press release issued by the NYSDEC, “[t]he update is designed to encourage smart growth and sustainable development across the state” and is intended to compliment the agency’s implementation of the New York State Lean Initiative, which the NYSDEC says has “improved public responsiveness and performance at DEC while maintaining high standards of environmental and natural resource protection.” The press release explains that “[t]he proposed amendments to SEQR will both streamline and strengthen the State’s environmental review process by expanding the actions not subject to further review, known as Type II actions, modifying certain thresholds for actions deemed more likely to require the preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS), making scoping of an EIS mandatory rather than optional, and making the acceptance procedures for a draft EIS more consistent.” Examples of proposed Type II actions that would be added to the SEQR regulations include: installation of broadband within an existing right-of-way; green infrastructure upgrades or retrofits; installing 5 MW or less of solar arrays on landfills, cleaned-up brownfield sites, wastewater...

California District Court Dismisses Facebook’s TCCWNA “Website Terms and Conditions” Lawsuit in Light of Valid Choice-of-Law Provision

by Michael R. McDonald and Joshua S. Levy

Posted in Class Action Defense

On February 6, 2017

New Jersey’s Truth-in-Consumer Contract, Warranty, and Notice Act (“TCCWNA”) ushered in a wave of class actions last year, targeting various provisions in retailers’ websites “terms and conditions.” Broadly speaking, the TCCWNA prohibits “consumer contracts” from containing language that violates any “clearly established legal right[s].” New Jersey courts have not been alone in adjudicating these cases, however, as a number of similar lawsuits have been brought in other jurisdictions, including California federal district courts. For example, on September 7, 2016, the Central District of California dismissed the complaint in Candelario v. Rip Curl, Inc. on standing grounds, holding that because the plaintiff’s “only connection to the Terms and Conditions appears to be her decision to read them” and because her complaint essentially alleged only “bare procedural violation[s]” of the TCCWNA – without more – she could not satisfy “the injury-in-fact requirement of Article III.” Even more recently, although on different grounds, the Northern District of California dismissed a “website terms and conditions” class action against Facebook. In Palomino v. Facebook, Inc., as in Candelario, the plaintiffs alleged that the social media company’s website terms and conditions violated the TCCWNA because of “provisions that purport to ‘1) disclaim liability for claims brought for Defendant’s negligent, willful, malicious and wanton misconduct; 2) bar claims for personal and economic injury...

David Freeman to Speak at New York City Brownfield Partnership Seminar

by Gibbons P.C.

Posted in Development/Redevelopment / Environmental and Green Issues

On February 1, 2017

David J. Freeman, a Director in the Gibbons Environmental Department and Co-Chair of the Brownfields Task Force of the Environmental Law Section of the New York State Bar Association, will speak at an upcoming seminar on “New York State’s Brownfield Cleanup Program: What to Look for in 2017.” The seminar is sponsored by the New York City Brownfield Partnership and will take place on February 7 from 9:00 to 10:00 a.m. Mr. Freeman and other panel members will review the major changes to the Program made by the 2015 amendments to the state’s Brownfield Cleanup Act, including the new definition of “brownfield site”; new deadlines for admission to the Program and for issuance of Certificates of Completion; new rules and DEC procedures with respect to costs that qualify for site preparation tax credits; and restrictions on tangible property credits for properties in New York City, including DEC’s new definition of an “underutilized” site.

Governor Signs Off on Amendments to New Jersey’s Electronic Waste Management Act

by Gibbons P.C.

Posted in Environmental and Green Issues

On January 27, 2017

On January 9, 2017, Governor Christie signed into law a bill aimed at fortifying New Jersey’s existing Electronic Waste Management Act, by ensuring that manufactures of certain consumer electronics shoulder the burden for recycling all such devices actually collected in the state during a calendar year. While this new law is technically a recast of the existing statutory scheme, the changes it affects are, in many ways, transformative. This blog provides a broad description of the previous law, the apparent conditions which prompted its revision, and the key innovations of the new law.