Recently, employers have found themselves the targets of RICO lawsuits for employing aliens who are unauthorized to work in the United States.  These lawsuits have been brought by other employees of the company, who are authorized to work, claiming that the employer’s hiring of “illegal aliens” unlawfully depressed their wages.  The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (which covers Maryland and Virginia) recently addressed such a lawsuit for the first time in Walters v.

A state court in Virginia sustained a non-compete agreement between a government contractor and a single-member LLC in Preferred Systems Solutions, Inc. v. GP Consulting, LLC Case No. CL 2010-6693 (Fairfax, Va. 2011).  It awarded the company $172,395 in damages.  “Non-compete” agreements are also called “non-competition agreements” and “covenants not to compete.” This case demonstrates the power of drafting a narrowly tailored non-compete agreement. Many employers, including government contractors who hire employees and sub-contractors to work “on-site”

Oftentimes, courts construe the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Family Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) in the employee’s favor, much to the disappointment of employers.  However, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently refused an invitation by a plaintiff-employee to overlook his technical noncompliance with the FMLA’s notice provision and it affirmed judgment in favor of the employer.  Walls v. Central Contra Costa Transit, No. 10-15967 (9th Cir. Aug. 3, 2011). In that case, the employee was a

In a recent decision that strengthened contractual freedom in the employment arena, the Virginia Supreme Court held that a partially-performed employment contract was not enforceable after the employee tried to renegotiate it.  This decision, Bennett v. Sage Payment Solutions, Inc., affirms the Fairfax County Circuit Court judgment, which upheld a jury verdict finding that the employee repudiated the contract four months into its year-long term. The case involved an executive, Robert Bennett, who was promoted to

It is infrequent that a losing plaintiff in a racial discrimination case is ordered to pay the legal fees incurred by the defendant, but it is an ever-present risk for plaintiffs who proceed to trial with very weak evidence of discrimination.  Forcing the plaintiff to pay the fees of the defendant is rare because it is typically limited to egregious circumstances.  However, a judge in the Eastern District of Virginia recently found the plaintiff’s continued