Shortly before Christmas, House Republicans finally gave in and sensibly agreed to the two-month extension for extended unemployment benefits.  When Congress returns after recess, debate will resume on whether to further continue the vitally needed unemployment insurance programs.  For more information on North Carolina’s Extended and Emergency Unemployment benefits, see the Division of Employment Security’s site, here.

Categories: Legislative Action Tags: Congress, DES, Emergency Unemployment Benefits, Extended Benefits, Labor and Employment, North Carolina, President Obama, Unemployment Benefits

The North Carolina Court of Appeals published a decision in a free-speech retaliation case in  Ginsberg v. Board of Governors of the University of North Carolina.  The plaintiff, who worked at NC State University as a teaching assistant professor, contended that the University had violated her First Amendment free speech rights by punishing her in a hiring decision in retaliation for her protected speech.  On November 9, 2007, the plaintiff was reprimand by professors for purportedly showing bias during her introductory statements on a film that was being presented on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  Just weeks later, the plaintiff was de-listed as a first-tier candidate for an open tenure track position, and some of the professors who had reprimanded her were on the search committee.  Nonetheless, affirming the trial court’s grant of summary judgment, the Court concluded that the plaintiff had failed to present sufficient evidence of causation between her protected speech and the university’s hiring decision.  The Court held that she had not supported her claim “beyond mere speculation.”

Categories: Judicial Decisions Tags: Appeals, Case Commentary, Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, First Amendment, Labor and Employment, NC Court of Appeals, North Carolina, Retaliation, Summary Judgment

Burton Craige authored a paper this month titled “Billed v. Paid: Present, Past, Future”.  Burton presented his paper this month at the North Carolina Advocates for Justice CLE, “Bill v. Paid: Counting the True Cost.”  His paper discusses the way the “Billed v. Paid” issue is handled in other states and how North Carolina’s law has changed over the years.

Introduction:

In June 2011, the North Carolina General Assembly enacted HB 542, titled “Tort Reform for Citizens and Businesses.”  Section 1.1 of HB 542 creates a new rule of evidence (Rule 414) that limits evidence of past medical expenses to “the amounts actually paid to satisfy the bills” and “the amounts actually necessary to satisfy the bills that have been incurred but not yet satisfied.”  Section 1.2 amends G.S. § 8-58.1, limiting the plaintiff’s testimony about reasonable medical expenses to the amount “paid or required to be paid in full satisfaction” of the charges. In combination, the new provisions, commonly referred to as “billed v. paid,” will significantly reduce the amount that injured plaintiffs can recover for their medical expenses.  The billed v. paid provisions are effective for all actions “arising on or after” October 1, 2011.

In the past decade, many states have confronted the billed v. paid issue in their appellate courts.  A handful of states have addressed the issue legislatively.  This paper reviews the experience in other jurisdictions, traces the evolution of billed v. paid in North Carolina, and identifies a potential constitutional challenge to the new legislation.

Categories: News of the Firm Tags: Articles, Burton Craige, CLE, Constitutional Law, Damages, Medical Bills, NC Legislature, NCAJ, North Carolina, Personal Injuries, Presentation

Burton Craige recently submitted an amicus brief with attorney Andrew J. Schwaba on behalf of the North Carolina Advocates for Justice in Jenkins v. Hearn Vascular Surgery P.A., addressing the question: “Is a child injured by prenatal medical malpractice barred from bringing a cause of action if the negligence occurred early in the pregnancy?”  A copy of the brief may be viewed here.

Summary of the Brief:  “Decades ago, North Carolina joined nearly every other state in recognizing that survivors of prenatal medical malpractice can bring negligence claims against the doctors responsible for their injuries and birth defects. … Our courts did not make recovery dependent on a fetus’s gestational age at the time of the negligence.

The question of whether North Carolina’s Wrongful Death Act, N.C.G.S. § 28A-18-2 creates a cause of action for the wrongful death of a nonviable fetus has no relation to claims of common law negligence.  When it is reasonably foreseeable that negligent care could injure a woman’s future child, doctors have the duty to avoid negligently placing the future child at risk of injury.  This duty does not depend on whether a fetus has reached the stage of viability.  Accepting a contrary rule would run counter to North Carolina law, break ranks with every other state, and deny a remedy to injured children who will suffer their entire lives because of avoidable medical negligence.”

Categories: News of the Firm Tags: amicus brief, Briefs, Burton Craige, Medical Malpractice, NC Court of Appeals, NCAJ, Negligence, North Carolina, Personal Injuries

Ending two ridiculously long waits, the Senate has finally confirmed Charlotte Judge Albert Diaz to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals and Greensboro Judge Catherine Eagles to the Middle District of North Carolina.  Both will be excellent judges, and their confirmations have been long overdue.  Other North Carolina nominations are still pending though.  Former Magistrate Judge Max Cogburn was unanimously approved by Senate Judiciary Committee a couple of weeks ago for a seat on the Western District of North Carolina federal court, but has not gotten a confirmation vote in the full Senate yet.

Categories: Legislative Action Tags: Appeals, Fourth Circuit, Judge Albert Diaz, Judge Catherine Eagles, Judge Max Cogburn, Judiciary Committee, Middle District of North Carolina, North Carolina, Senate, Western District of North Carolina

On Friday, President Obama signed the large tax cut bill that includes an extension of extended unemployment benefits through the end of 2011.  While, the extension of those benefits was sorely needed, it is extremely unfortunate that the bill did not include additional spending measures that would stimulate the economy.  As further evidence that the Great Recession continues, the latest report shows that North Carolina lost 12,500 jobs in November, more than any other state, pushing the statewide unemployment rate to 9.7 percent.  Without further assistance, the economy is unlikely to grow enough to create the needed amount of jobs.  And, 2011 state budget cuts, which are starting to be discussed, are likely to make things even worse.

Categories: General News, Legislative Action Tags: Budget Cuts, Extended Unemployment, Jobs, Labor and Employment, North Carolina, President Obama, Unemployment Benefits, Unemployment Rate

This New York Times article discusses an important employment issue that may become more prevelant: whether and how employers may test and discipline employees for using legal prescription drugs.  As the article relates, drug testing like this is regulated in part by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

In North Carolina, two other state statutes can come into play.  First is the Controlled Substance Examination Regulation, N.C. Gen. Stat. 95-230 et seq., which specifies some of the required procedures for drug testing.

Second is the statute protecting against workplace discrimination against persons for the lawful use of lawful products, N.C. Gen. Stat. 95-28.2.  Under the law, an employer generally may not discriminate based on an employee’s “lawful use of lawful products if the activity occurs off the premises of the employer during nonworking hours and does not adversely affect the employee’s job performance or the person’s ability to properly fulfill the responsibilities of the position in question or the safety of other employees.”

Categories: General News Tags: ADA, Americans with Disabilities Act, Controlled Substances, Discrimination, Drug Testing, Labor and Employment, New York Times, North Carolina

At the 26th Annual North Carolina/South Carolina Labor and Employment Law CLE held in Asheville, North Carolina, Jonathan Harkavy will present his 2009-10 annual review of the Supreme Court’s employment law cases.  His paper is entitled Supreme Court Employment Law Decisions, 2009 Term.

Introduction: The 2009 Term of the Supreme Court of the United States illustrated in unmistakable fashion the central role that workplace regulation plays in the lives of our citizens. The Court’s determination of a broad range of employment-related issues maintained its focus on employment law that began several terms ago. Not only do this term’s decisions affect a variety of policies and rules applicable to workers, employers and benefit providers, but the Roberts Court’s unabashed interest in doctrinal development, revealed by a deeper look at its decisions, also is reshaping the employment relationship itself and altering how work-related disputes are to be resolved.  Read more…

Categories: News of the Firm Tags: Articles, Asheville, Jonathan Harkavy, Labor and Employment, NCBA, North Carolina, Presentation, US Supreme Court

In this case, plaintiffs are bringing collective action claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) based on the under-payment of wages and overtime at Smithfield Packing’s Tar Heel, North Carolina meat processing facility.  Magistrate Judge Gates issued an opinion last week recommending that defendant’s motion to decertify the FLSA collective action be denied.  If his recommendation is approved by the district judge, the case will proceed to trial as a collective action.  The plaintiffs are represented by several lawyers, including Ann Groninger.

Continue for details from the opinion: Read more…

Categories: Judicial Decisions, Results Tags: Ann Groninger, Case Commentary, Class Certification, Collective Action, EDNC, FLSA, Labor and Employment, North Carolina, Smithfield Packing, Unpaid Wages, Wage and Hour

Last week, the Senate finally passed the $26 billion package to aid states that are still reeling from the effects of the recession.  The legislation provides $10 billion to retain teachers who might otherwise lose jobs to cutbacks, and an additional $16 billion to help states with rising health care costs.  The bill was quickly passed by the House and signed by President Obama.

Of that amount, North Carolina received about $300 million to save teachers’ jobs.  North Carolina leaders are now figuring out when and how to use the money.  Obviously, one possibility would be to use some of the funds to re-hire teachers and teaching assistants who were recently laid off due to budget cuts.  Also, some amount may be saved till next year, when the state’s deficit will reach its highest level.

Categories: Legislative Action Tags: Budget, Congress, Jobs, Labor and Employment, North Carolina, President Obama, Teacher Assistants, Teachers