When the Manville Corporation filed under Chapter 11 of the federal Bankruptcy Code in 1982, it was the most financially healthy company ever to do so. Its action temporarily halted product-liability lawsuits brought against the company by the victims of asbestos-related cancer and other diseases. "Outrageous Misconduct" updates Paul Brodeur's remarkable four-part series of articles on the asbestos industry that appeared in "The New Yorker". It examines Manville's unprecedented -- and headline-making -- maneuver; it exposes the efforts of other asbestos manufacturers to avoid compensating asbestos victims; and it reveals the involvement of some of the nation's highest officials in trying to bail out the asbestos industry from its financial and legal difficulties. In "Outrageous Misconduct" Brodeur reveals in depth and detail the story of how Manville and other companies effected a fifty-year coverup of the asbestos hazard. He also tells the story of how a handful of dedicated trial lawyers have pieced together the overwhelming evidence of this coverup and used it in courtrooms across the nation to win hundreds of millions of dollars in damages from the asbestos industry and its insurers. -- From publisher's description.

The law of sexual harassment is constantly evolving, and the number of sexual harassment claims is dramatically on the rise. Sexual Harassment in the Workplace, Fourth Edition, is a comprehensive guide that provides all the information you need to successfully litigate a sexual harassment claim. Sexual Harassment in the Workplace guides you through the relevant administrative and legal proceedings, from client interviews to attorney's fees. It discusses state and federal remedies available to maximize recovery, including: The development and elements of the claim Sample pleadings Discovery documents Reviews of actual cases Special attention is given to important topics such as: Suits by alleged harassers Insurance indemnification Class actions And many others Sexual Harassment in the Workplace brings you up to date on the latest case law developments, including the following: A new checklist of items to cover when representing an employer The U.S. Supreme Court confirmed that retaliation is actionable under Title IX where a girls' high school basketball coach claimed that he suffered retaliation for complaining about sexual discrimination in the athletic program of the school, even though he himself was not the direct victim. Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education, 544 U.S. 167 (2005) In order to increase opportunities for mediation, the EEOC expanded the charges eligible for mediation and now mediation is available at the conciliation stage, after a finding of discrimination has been issued, in appropriate cases The U.S. Supreme Court has held that under the Federal Arbitration Act, where parties to an arbitration agreement include a provision that delegates to the arbitrator the threshold question of enforceability of the arbitration agreement, if a party specifically challenges the enforceability of the entire agreement, the arbitrator would consider the challenge. If, however, the party only challenges the enforceability of the arbitration provision, the challenge must be heard by a court. Rent-A-Center, West Inc. v. Jackson, 130 S. Ct. 2772 (2010) The lack of timeliness in filing a discrimination action is an affirmative defense and the burden of proof is on the employer. Salas v. Wisconsin Department of Corrections, 493 F.3d 913, 922 (7th Cir 2007) A federal employee's premature filing of a sexual harassment employment discrimination and retaliation complaint did not constitute a failure to exhaust administrative remedies so as to deprive the district court of subject-matter jurisdiction. Brown v. Snow, 440 F.3d 1259 (11th Cir. 2006) A majority of states impose a shorter period for filing with their agencies, though, so the filing deadline is not always extended when a state has its own agency The andquot;single filing ruleandquot; - under which a party who has not filed an EEOC charge or received a right-to-sue notice may andquot;piggybackandquot; his or her judicial action on the claim of a party who has satisfied those prerequisites - has been described as a andquot;carefully limited exceptionandquot; to Title VII's procedural requirements. Price v. Choctaw Glove and Safety Co., 459 F.3d 595 (5th Cir. 2006) Provided that an act contributing to the claim occurs within the filing period, the court may consider the entire period of the hostile environment for purposes of determining liability. Jordan v. City of Cleveland, 464 F.3d 584 (6th Cir. 2006) The Supreme Court has held that a plaintiff's timely filing of an EEOC intake questionnaire, which was followed by an affidavit stating andquot;Please force Federal Express to end their age discrimination . . .andquot; constituted a charge, cautioning, however, that its permissiv

Sexual Harassment in the Workplace: Law and Practice