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
- Ohio Employers, Be Ready: The Paystub Protection Act Takes Effect Soon
- Video: Should Employers Shift Workforce Data Collection Under President Trump? - Employment Law This Week
- New Tennessee Immigration Enforcement Law: Key Measures and Implications
- Video: Workplace Law Shake-Up - DEI Challenges, NLRB Reversals, and EEOC Actions - Employment Law This Week
- California’s AI Revolution: Proposed CPPA Regulations Target Automated Decision Making