Chicago Business Litigation Lawyer Blog
Whey they buy a used car, many consumers rely on Carfax or AutoCheck to reports to see if car of their dreams has been in an accident, suffered flood damage, been stolen, or had some other issue that would lower its value substantially. As a result, many car dealerships will offer to provide the Carfax report to prospective buyers. However, consumers cannot rely on these reports and should get the car inspected by a knowledgeable mechanic and body shop before purchasing any used car. We have found in our cases that Carfax reports can be incomplete for a number a reasons; many of our clients have been deceived by the Carfax report provided by the dealer and have purchased rebuilt wrecks and flood cars. Reports like Carfax have come under fire in the past for often providing inaccurate or incomplete information when information has been hidden from them such as past owners failing to report accidents and fixing the car without notifying later purchasers of the damage. Further, when the report is provided by the dealer, you cannot be 100% positive that the report is current and accurate and that the vehicle has not been in an accident flood or damaged. Continue reading ›
Grocery Chain Publix Faces Overtime Lawsuit
The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) is a federal law that governs things like the minimum wages employees can be paid, as well as when they should be paid overtime and how much they should be paid for overtime. States also have their own labor laws to govern minimum wage and overtime, among other issues, for all employees working within the state.
In addition to getting paid for all the hours they spend working, many employees expect to receive pay for a certain amount of time off and sometimes bonuses. Paid time off usually includes holidays that the employer is closed, but is still paying the employee. Many employers also give their workers a certain number of sick days or vacation days (sometimes both) for which the employee can be paid in a calendar year. This is all time for which employees can reasonably expect to be paid, and in some cases, the law requires them to be paid for this time. Continue reading ›
Non-Competition Agreements – When Can They be Enforced?
Many clients come to us with misunderstandings with regard to non-compete agreements which are often called covenants not to compete. Some clients believe because an employee signed the agreement it is an iron glad and enforceable agreement no matter how broad and restrictive the terms of the agreement. Some employees come in with the belief that the agreements can never be enforced against them. So when are these agreements enforceable? It depends on many factors.
Each state has its own set of rules but there are many similarities in those states that enforce such agreement. In California, however, they are invalid and against policy. Illinois courts, on the other hand, enforce such agreements when they are:
- In writing;
- Made part of the employment contract;
- Supported by valid consideration such as two years of employment or other payments;
- Reasonable as to time and territory; and
- Designed to protect the employer’s legitimate business interests.
The first two requirements are fairly self-explanatory. The last three, however, require analysis and review of the facts and circumstances.
Supported by valid consideration:
Consideration is a concept that applies to all kinds contracts, not simply to non-compete agreements. Contracting party must each obtain some consideration or benefit for entering into the contract. The contract must provide to each party a benefit to which that party would not be entitled if the party had not entered into the contract. With non-compete agreements, the affected employee might receive a new job, a promotion, a raise or a bonus for his or her agreement to enter into a non-compete or work for the employer for a significant period such as two years after entering into the agreement. In summary, for an employee to be bound that employee has to obtain some real benefit for entering into the agreement or work a long time for the company after signing the agreement.
Reasonable as to time and territory:
Non-compete agreements cannot usually be unlimited when it comes to time and territory. In other words, a business cannot subject former employees to an agreement with restricts them from competing everywhere, forever. Determining what is reasonable however depends on many circumstances.
Designed to protect the employer’s legitimate business interests:
Courts will only enforce restrictions on an individual’s right to work when the employer can show that those restrictions protect a legitimate business interest. Such interests can be protecting client relationships and confidential or secret information that provides a competitive advantage and was developed at substantial cost. In crafting covenants not to compete, employers should avoid restricting employees more than is needed to protect legitimate interests and the substantial investment they have made in developing competitive advantages for their businesses.
The Takeaway:
The truth is that many courts do not like to enforce covenants not to compete unless they are properly tailored and do like to put people out of work.
Bank of America Agrees to Settle Overtime Case on a Class Wide Basis
Hiring part-time employees can be a great way for businesses to fill in the gaps in their employee schedule while saving money. It can also be beneficial for employees looking for flexible hours. On the other hand, part-time employees are often left without the benefits of full-time employees, including health insurance and vacation time. Labor law generally requires an employee to work at least 20 hours per week before she is entitled to access to her employer’s health insurance or paid vacation time.
Even if an employee is taken on to work full time, the picture is not always rosy. Employees who are paid at least a salary of $23,600 per year and meet certain qualifications can legally be exempted from overtime compensation, even if they work more than forty hours a week.
Under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), employees can be exempt from overtime if they fit into one of three categories: administrative, executive, and professional. For the administrative category, an employee must perform primarily office work and provide administrative assistance directly to an executive. The executive category includes managers and all employees who spend more than half their time supervising other employees. The professional category is made up of workers whose jobs require a specific set of skills or level of education, including doctors, lawyers, and performers. Continue reading ›
Class Action Brought Against DirecTV for Alleged Unpaid Overtime
Many workers have become accustomed to the standard 9-to-5 schedule, in which they work eight hours a day, five days a week. In some parts of the country, that has shifted to ten hours a day, four days out of the week. This gives employees a three-day weekend every week and some studies have shown this schedule actually boosts productivity.
The potential problem this new schedule poses has to do with overtime compensation. Under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), employees are entitled to one and one-half times their normal hourly wages for all time spent working after eight hours a day or forty hours a week. The Act does take into account the potential for the four-day workweek, but it has specific requirements for when employees can work ten-hour days without getting paid the proper overtime rate. Continue reading ›
Lawsuit Alleges Thousands of Target Workers Were Misclassified and Denied Overtime Pay
Large retail stores, such as Target and Walgreens, have faced a number of public lawsuits from their employees. One of the most recent lawsuits alleges Target misclassified some of its employees as exempt from overtime, and as a result, failed to pay those employees the proper overtime compensation when they worked more than forty hours a week. Target denies these claims and asserts it complied with the law.
Under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), employers are required to pay all their workers no less than $7.25 per hour. For all time spent working after eight hours a day or forty hours a week, employers are required to pay the proper overtime rate of one and one-half times the employee’s normal hourly wage. The FLSA does list some exceptions to this rule, but it is very specific about the types of employees that can qualify for exempt status.
The FLSA describes three main types of employees that are not entitled to overtime. An employee who is paid a salary of at least $23,600 and works in either an administrative, executive, or professional capacity is not entitled to overtime compensation. However, rather than simply classifying employees as fitting into one of these categories, the FLSA has specific requirements for each category. Continue reading ›
Certified Used Cars Do Not Always Meet Certification Specifications — Our Chicago Autofraud Lawyers Bring Suit To For Damages Arising From False Certifications
Buying a used car is always a risky business. You can never really know what the car went through in the hands of previous owners. In order to put customers’ minds at ease, car dealerships started offering “certified pre-owned” vehicles. The “certified” label is supposed to ward off consumers’ suspicion by providing a guarantee that the vehicle had to pass an inspection before going up for sale again. In exchange for this peace of mind, certified pre-owned vehicles are usually sold for a much higher price than a standard used car. But what exactly does this inspection consist of?
It turns out there are currently no legal requirements for selling a certified pre-owned vehicle. Instead, each manufacturer and car dealer has its own requirements, which can range from a 32-point inspection to a 300-point inspection. Continue reading ›
GE Capital Retail Cannot Avoid Class Certification in TCPA Unwanted Cell Phone Call Class Action — Our Chicago TCPA and Unwanted Cell Phone Call Lawyers File TCPA Class Actions
Defendants in class action lawsuits sometimes try to avoid class certification by claiming it would be too difficult to identify and find all the potential class members. But just because something is hard doesn’t mean it’s impossible or not worth doing.
GE Capital Retail Bank is the latest corporation to use this excuse in an attempt to avoid a class action lawsuit. The bank is accused of violating the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) by allegedly using an autodialer to send prerecorded debt collection messages to cellphone users who weren’t even customers of the bank. Continue reading ›