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
- At the Half: No Free Kicks in FDA’s 2026 Enforcement
- CMS Codifies Drug Price Negotiation Program—With Modifications for 2029
- Federal Embryo Adoption Program Raises Potential Legal Questions for Reproductive Health
- Vermont’s H. 583 Restricts Private Equity and Hedge Funds with Ownership and Controlling Interests from Interfering with Clinical Judgment of Health Care Providers
- DOJ’s Second National Health Care Fraud Takedown of the Second Trump Administration Heavily Targets Medicaid Fraud