Employment and Labor Law Attorneys Representing Employees

Haskin Lauter & LaRue
255 North Alabama Street
Indianapolis, IN 46204
E-mail | Map & Directions

Legal News

Talk to a Lawyer Today!

News

[05/09] Paragon Technologies Announces Conference Call Webcast of 2008 First Quarter Results
[05/09] China producer price index up 8.1 pct

More...

[05/09] SIRIUS Satellite Radio and NBA to Host Reunion of 1972-73 NBA Champion New York Knicks
[05/09] Cleanse, Firm, and Exfoliate - Actifirm(R) Returns to QVC

More...

Case Summaries

[05/09] McCann v. Tillman
In a Title VII suit against an employer alleging claims of racial discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment, summary judgment for employer is affirmed where: 1) the record demonstrated that employee's claims of favorable disparate treatment of similarly situated white employees were inapposite to establish a prima facie case of discrimination; 2) employee failed to meet the burden of showing that the reasons for her employer's actions were actually a pretext for retaliatory conduct; and 3) despite employee's allegations of exposure to offensive derogatory language at work, the evidence presented was insufficient to support a claim of hostile work environment.

[05/08] U.S. v. Harper
In an action alleging intentional and negligent misrepresentation by defendant's failure to disclose information in a referral letter, judgment against one defendant is reversed where: 1) the referral letter was not affirmatively misleading since it did not comment nor recommend on the doctor's proficiency; and 2) defendant did not have an affirmative duty to disclose negative facts. As for other defendants, their liability is affirmed, but the case is vacated and remanded in order to determine if there needs to be a re-apportionment of damages between the remaining defendants.

More...

[04/30] Simpson Strong-Tie Co., Inc. v. Gore
In a manufacturer's action for defamation, trade libel, false advertising, and unfair business practices, arising after defendant-attorney published a newspaper ad stating that users of certain brand name galvanized screws under specified circumstances "may" have legal rights to compensation or other relief, grant of a motion to strike the complaint is affirmed where: 1) the suit was a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) which is subject to summary disposition under the anti-SLAPP law; 2) the suit was not exempt from that law as a statement "about" the attorney's services, or one made in the course of delivering those services; and 3) the manufacturer did not establish the requisite likelihood of prevailing on the merits to avoid a dismissal of its action.

[04/30] Trans-Spec Truck Serv., Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
In a case applying the accrual and statute of limitations provisions of the Massachusetts U.C.C. to breach of warranty claims brought against an engine manufacturer, dismissal of plaintiff's warranty and Massachusetts Gen. Laws chapter 93A claims as time-barred, as well as summary judgment for defendant on plaintiff's negligence claims, are affirmed where: 1) the breach of warranty claim, accruing on the date of delivery of goods, was filed after the expiration of the limitations period, and plaintiff's equitable estoppel arguments were unavailing; and 2) plaintiff made no compelling argument and cited no specific facts which would invalidate the exculpatory language contained in a negligence exclusion clause.

More...

[05/07] Trujillo v. PacifiCorp
In an action brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and ERISA, summary judgment for defendant is reversed and the case remanded where: 1) plaintiffs raised the necessary inference of discriminatory motive to establish a prima facie case of association discrimination through evidence that defendant monitored plaintiffs' son's health care costs, and that defendant was concerned to cut down on overall health care costs; 2) there was temporal proximity between the relapse of the plaintiff's son's cancer and the investigation by defendant for time theft; 3) defendant was not able to present a legitimate business reason since it treated similarly-situated employees differently; and 4) there were several irregularities in defendant's investigation of plaintiffs for time theft.

[05/01] U.S. v. Jackson
Defendants' convictions and sentences for bank fraud are affirmed where: 1) unpaid employer contributions to a company's ERISA plan constitute plan assets; 2) defendants were guilty of ERISA theft regardless of whether they were fiduciaries; 3) there was sufficient evidence to support their convictions; 4) the fraud-loss amount resulting in a seventeen-level increase to the offense level under the Sentencing Guidelines was not miscalculated; and 5) there was no error with the increase of the offense level based on defendants' actions.

More...

[05/08] In re: Straightline Invs., Inc.
A judgment under 11 U.S.C. section 549(a) avoiding the transfer to appellant of corporate bankruptcy debtor's accounts receivable which had a face value of approximately $200,600 is affirmed over appellant's claims that: 1) the transfer of accounts receivable was not an avoidable transfer because there was no depletion or diminution of debtor's estate; 2) the transfer was an outright sale of receivables in the ordinary course of business, and the defenses of recoupment and earmarking should apply to bar recovery by the trustee; and 3) even if it was avoidable, the wrong measure of recovery was awarded.

[05/06] Pludeman v. N. Leasing Sys., Inc.
The court of appeals rules that plaintiffs sufficiently pleaded a cause of action for fraud against individually-named corporate defendants pursuant to CPLR 3016(b) where it was not unequivocal, as a matter of law, that a finder of fact could not reasonably infer the requisite knowledge or participation by the individual defendants in an act of fraud.

More...

[05/08] Royal Ins. Co. of Am. v. Orient Overseas Container Line Ltd.
In an action brought by Ford and its cargo insurer against defendant-ocean carrier for damages arising from the loss of cargo during a transatlantic voyage, partial summary judgment for defendant and third-party defendants is reversed where the district court erroneously interpreted the bill of lading to apply Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA) instead of the Hague-Visby Rules, and additional briefing and fact-finding may be required before the liability limitation may be appropriately applied. (Amended opinion)

[05/07] Family Home & Fin. Ctr, Inc. v. Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp.
In mortgage broker's action raising claims against Freddie Mac for intentional interference with contract, unfair competition under California state law, and defamation, summary judgment and a related ruling for Freddie Mac are affirmed where: 1) the intentional interference claim failed as there was no admissible evidence that Freddie Mac influenced or caused another party to terminate its mortgage broker contract with plaintiff, intentionally or otherwise; 2) Freddie Mac's placement of plaintiff on its "Exclusionary List" did not constitute unfair competition; 3) for purposes of the defamation claim, plaintiff failed to show malice to defeat the Common Interest Privilege; and 4) there was no abuse of discretion in denying a request to defer ruling on summary judgment.

More...

Articles

The Fair Labor Standards Act: Your Right To Get Paid

The French writer Voltaire once pointed out that work spares us from three great evils: boredom, vice and need. Most of us can tolerate a little boredom, and some may even enjoy a small helping of vice. But need is something we would all rather avoid. Although most people like their jobs to be fun and fulfilling, what they likely want most is to be paid -- fairly and on time -- so that they can enjoy the other aspects of their lives.

More...

What laws protect disabled workers from workplace discrimination?

The Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of workers' disabilities. Generally, the ADA prohibits employers from:

More...

Frequently Asked Questions

What may an employer say about why an employee left or was fired?

Learn More: Employment Law

More...

The Indiana employment law attorneys at Haskin Lauter & LaRue represent clients throughout Indiana, including the cities of Indianapolis, Bloomington, Elkhart, Goshen, Evansville, Kokomo, Lafayette, New Albany, Muncie, Terre Haute, Fort Wayne, South Bend, Richmond, and Anderson.