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
- Video: FMLA and FLSA Compliance in 2026—New DOL Opinion Letters and Emerging Risks - Employment Law This Week
- Federal Shutdowns and Workplace Law: Navigating Legal Uncertainty
- Epstein Becker Green’s Employment Law 2025 Highlight Reel: 10 Issues That Dominated—and What’s Lurking in 2026
- Video: Employment Law in 2026: What to Expect - Employment Law This Week
- When Your Data Sets Your Price: New York Takes on Algorithmic Pricing