In today’s economy, litigants in divorce cases are just as likely to be fighting over shared debts as shared assets.  As a result, many divorcing parties smartly settle cases quickly, rather than driving themselves further into debt with additional attorney’s fees.  In fact, settling rather than litigating a case can be a wise financial decision for any individual or business, even outside the family law context.  This is not to say there is not a

No, not unless it specifically says so, according to a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.  In that case, the Fourth Circuit ruled that Virginia non-compete law generally presumes that expiration differs from termination, and thus a post-termination restriction like a non-competition clause must specify if expiration is a triggering event. In Hamden v. Total Car Franchising Corporation, No. 12-2085 (4th Cir. Nov. 22, 2013), the Fourth Circuit reviewed

Generally, yes, based on the disruption it would cause to the employer’s operations.   A recent Fourth Circuit decision confirms that the typical employer need not grant a flexible schedule, but can require adherence to a standard reduced-hour work schedule to accommodate a seriously ill employee’s need for medical leave.  See Ranade v. BT Americas Inc., No. 1:12cv1039 (E.D. Va. Oct. 28, 2013). Two federal laws governing medical leave require medium-to-large employers to try to accommodate

In a recent unpublished opinion, the Fourth Circuit decided that a significant portion of an employee’s lawsuit should have proceeded when she was terminated just six days after she complained about age discrimination at work.  The case is Buchhagen v. ICF International, Inc., et al., and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit overturned a District Court’s decision to dismiss the worker’s claims for wrongful discharge and retaliation under the Age Discrimination in

Surprisingly no, as shown by a recent federal court decision in Virginia rejecting such a claim by an Employee Assistance Program (EAP) counselor who helped an employee stop alleged harassment.  See DeMasters v. Carilion Clinic, Civil Action No. 7:12-cv-580 (W.D. Va. Sep. 17, 2013).  As this decision shows, the law does not require employee relations personnel to warn employees that their loyalties lie with the employer, and can lead to complicated interactions involving these professionals,