Winston Salem, NC
Workers compensation Lawyer at Winston Salem, NC
Practice Areas: Workers Compensation, Employment & Labor ... +2 more
OUTCOME: Affirmed for plaintiff.
Defendants argue that there is not competent evidence supporting the Commission’s findings that (1) plaintiff’s employment exposed her to a greater risk of contracting CTS than the general public and ... (2) plaintiff’s employment with Sara Lee caused her CTS. We disagree.
OUTCOME: Prevailed on the director's civil rights contract claim.
While on the board, the director complained about the under representation of women and minorities in the corporation's employ. When she was not renominated to serve another term on the board, the corp ... oration issued several communications indicating that the director had retired from the board. The director claimed that these statements were libelous per se and per quod, as tending to impeach her in her trade or profession. The court disagreed, as the statement did not hold the director up to public hatred, contempt or ridicule or cause her to be shunned or avoided. However, the court found that the director stated a claim for retaliation under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1981. Her complaints regarding employment of women and minorities were protected activities. The court found there was a contract within the purview of § 1981, and that failing to renominate her to the board was an adverse employment action: the director promised to provide her services as a director; and the corporation promised to compensate her for her services. Under § 1981, the corporation could not terminate this agreement, or refuse to re-enter into it, on the basis of the director's participation in protected activity.
OUTCOME: Unemployment benefits awarded to employee
Employee who failed to "clock out during dizzy spell" was denied unemployment benefits. Case taken to Court of Appelas and employee awarded benefits.
OUTCOME: Unemployment benefits awarded to employee
Employee who failed to "clock out during dizzy spell" was denied unemployment benefits. Case taken to Court of Appelas and employee awarded benefits.
OUTCOME: Covenant not ot compete was ruled unenforceable. Employee's claims against employer were allowed and employee received monetary damages.
Client removed from new job because he signed a covenant not to compete with former employer.
Ad
Transform legal challenges into solutions.
Connect now to review your situation.
