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
- When AI Becomes Part of Medicine: Why CMS’s AI Questions Matter Now
- Watch: Gender-Affirming Care: What Health Care Providers Need to Know About Federal Enforcement – Thought Leaders in Health Law
- Executive Order 14321 at One Year: Civil Commitment Policy Shifts and Provider Impact
- Watch: FDA’s 2026 Enforcement Priorities: What In-House Counsel Must Know – Thought Leaders in Health Law
- The Future of 340B: New Bills Offer Competing Solutions to Modernize the 340B Drug Discount Program