In employment litigation, plaintiffs often rely on the “cat’s paw” doctrine to hold their employers liable for discriminatory or retaliatory animus of a supervisory employee who influenced, but did not make, the ultimate employment decision. On August 29, 2016, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in Vasquez v. Empress Ambulance Service, Inc., greatly extended the reach of the “cat’s paw,” holding that the doctrine could be applied to hold an employer liable for an adverse employment decision that was influenced by the discriminatory or ...
Blog Editors
Recent Updates
- Pumping the Brakes: New York Seeks to Curb AI Acceleration in Labor Market
- Video: California Governor’s PAGA Deal: What Employers Need to Know - Employment Law This Week
- Act Now: New York Employers Must Provide Paid Lactation Breaks to Employees
- Supreme Court Overturns Chevron—but for Stakeholders, the Impact Is No Cause for Alarm
- Fifth Circuit Narrows Application of the Crime-Fraud Exception to the Attorney-Client Privilege in Investigations