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 ...
Recent Updates
- Comment Period Closes on California OHCA’s Proposed Emergency Regulations Expanding Private Equity, Hedge Fund, and MSO Reporting in Health Care Transactions
- DOJ Revises Justice Manual on Non-Binding Guidance and Qui Tam Dismissals: Practical Considerations
- Additional SBA Crackdown on Pandemic-Era Fraud Leads to Program and Loan Suspensions, Possible FCA Enforcement
- Federal Regulatory Views on Cybersecurity and AI Amidst a Growing Threat Landscape
- Remote Monitoring Services Under the 2027 PFS Proposed Rule: Epstein Becker Green Submits Comments to CMS