Articles

Receiving an accurate paycheck is a basic right, yet for many school teachers and administrators, it can be a nightmare.  Why is this so?  Because school districts are notorious for making mistakes.

One of the hottest issues these days is whether an employee has a right of privacy with respect to personal email and/or text messages sent while at work. The use of email and text messaging to communicate with family members and friends is a commonplace occurrence, especially during working hours.

In a case where important legal rights collided, the Ninth Circuit has ruled that a professor who posted racist email on a community college’s web server did not engage in workplace harassment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.The case is Rodriguez v.

If a teacher has a DUI conviction, can the state Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CTC) utilize a “per se” standard and conclude that the person is aromatically disqualified as a matter of law from teaching in California?  The answer is no.  In the case of Broney v.

Accommodating students who suffer from disabilities can be a daunting challenge, especially for cash-strapped school districts.  The issue played out recently with respect to the administration of insulin to diabetic students.  In a nutshell, the issue in American Nurses Association v.

One of the most difficult issues for a school principal is to determine student discipline.

Nelson Anthoine, a low-level employee of the North Central Counties Consortium, jumped the chain of command to report directly to the consortium’s chairman that his immediate supervisor had misrepresented the status of the consortium’s compliance with legal obligations.

If an employer adopts a discriminatory standard 15 years ago and no claim is brought against it, can an employee (or group of employees) file suit years later based upon a more recent application of the discriminatory standard? The U.S.

In an important decision protecting free speech, the California Supreme Court has ruled that a lawyer who mentions a company’s allegedly defective product in an advertisement directed at potential clients may invoke the state’s powerful “anti-SLAPP” statute and get the case dismissed.

In Mohawk Industries v. Carpenter, the U.S. Supreme Court held that there is no right to appeal from an interim court order requiring disclosure of information covered by the attorney-client privilege.