Wage and Hour Litigation

South Carolina has no state laws pertaining to overtime, meal periods or breaks. There are also no state laws mandating paid or unpaid leave or holiday pay. However, the South Carolina Wage Payment Statute requires employers to pay employees what they are promised, whether it be wages, salary, commissions, bonuses, vacation pay, or paid sick [...]

By | August 22nd, 2017|Employment Law, Litigation, Unpaid wages|Comments Off on Wage and Hour Litigation

A Guide to Compassionately Understanding Your Lawyer (Bless Their Heart)

If you have occasion to speak with a lawyer, you may find yourself on the unfortunate receiving end of an overly-long sentence that is filled with incomprehensible legal terms or phrases, jargon, terms of art, or Latin curse words. As a lawyer myself, I can attest to the fact that I don’t intend to confuse a [...]

By | July 13th, 2017|Litigation|Comments Off on A Guide to Compassionately Understanding Your Lawyer (Bless Their Heart)

What the Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 Means For South Carolina Employees

Although there was very little notice by the press or voters, trade secrets lawyers saw a significant development in the law recently.  Last month, President Obama signed into law the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA). The DTSA provides a federal counterpart to the various state laws that already govern trade secret litigation. Currently [...]

By | June 10th, 2016|Litigation, trade secrets|Comments Off on What the Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 Means For South Carolina Employees

Overtime Law: Basic Considerations under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)

The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) requires that employers pay employees a minimum wage and an overtime premium of 1.5 times the regular hourly rate for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours. But how do you know if the FLSA's protections apply to you, the employee? Here are the five initial questions to [...]

By | September 25th, 2015|FLSA, Litigation, Overtime|Comments Off on Overtime Law: Basic Considerations under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)

School’s Legal Troubles Set an Example

South Carolina State University, the state’s only publicly funded historically black college, has undergone a long saga of financial woes, often attributed to low attendance and state funding. However, what wasn’t reported until recently is one contributor to the school’s financial woes is the amount of lawsuits filed against the school, most of them from former employees. […]

By | May 4th, 2015|Employment Law, Litigation|Comments Off on School’s Legal Troubles Set an Example

Zimmer All-Metal Hips Next Wave of Products Liability Lawsuits

I will soon be filing an action for a client who had both hips replaced with metal-on-metal hips manufactured by Zimmer. Since the replacements, the pain has been debilitating.

By | June 26th, 2011|Litigation, Personal injury, Products Liability|Comments Off on Zimmer All-Metal Hips Next Wave of Products Liability Lawsuits

Spartanburg Kiddie Train Tragedy: More Questions than Answers

UPDATE 3/24/11–Well, less than a week out and the first lawsuit has been filed.  And it appears to be on behalf of someone who was clearly injured, but lucky compared to many of the injured.  But, it is their right to seek a prompt remedy for their injuries–including medical bills.  And it may not be so prompt in the end.  “Justice delayed” is certainly one flaw of our civil and criminal justice systems. I have also done some additional legal research on the caps issue (see below).  And there is a pretty good argument for circumventing the $600,000 aggregate cap by alleging multiple acts of negligence.  The $600,000 cap applies to any single occurrence, no matter how many are injured; however, single “occurrence” which is defined as ““an unfolding sequence of events which proximately flow from a single act of negligence.” See S.C. Code § 15-78-30(g); see also Chastain v. AnMed Health Found., 388 S.C. 170, 173, 694 S.E.2d 541, 543 (2010).  It seems that the failure of LLR to inspect and the admission of the conductor that he was going too fast are two separate and distinct acts of negligence.  The counter argument: “Well yes, but the events unfold into a single (and indivisible) harm.”  A court will decide. This issue will be at the front and center of this case.  But, with the possibility of a multiplier for the $600,000 gives hope that those who suffered harm will receive full and complete relief.  Personal responsibility should not be capped and neither should government’s responsibility. […]

By | March 22nd, 2011|Litigation, Personal injury|Comments Off on Spartanburg Kiddie Train Tragedy: More Questions than Answers

Oh No You Didn’t: Supreme Court Extends Title VII Protection Against Retaliation

In an eight-page opinion by Justice Scalia, the Supreme Court unanimously held that (1) North American Stainless violated Title VII if it fired Thompson in retaliation for Regalado’s complaint; and (2) Title VII provides Thompson with a cause of action against his former employer.

By | March 14th, 2011|Employment Law, Litigation|Comments Off on Oh No You Didn’t: Supreme Court Extends Title VII Protection Against Retaliation