News & Analysis

In a recent proposal, the EU Commission has taken a position on improving (minimum) protections for whistleblowers and ensuring these protections are uniform throughout Europe.

The U.S. Supreme Court closed out its most recent term, which began in October 2017, with a number of high-profile and ground-breaking decisions.

The purpose of this paper is to describe an employer’s legal rights and options when an employee has removed confidential information without permission.

A recent Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision has upheld that successful plaintiffs are entitled to non-economic damages under Pennsylvania’s Whistleblower Law.

On February 21, 2018, the Supreme Court resolved a circuit split on whether the Dodd-Frank Act requires employees to report externally to the SEC in order to be protected by the Act’s anti-retaliation provision.

In a recent decision with potentially far-reaching implications for foreign and multinational employers, the DOL's Administrative Review Board held that SOX's whistleblower provisions have extraterritorial application.

The Minnesota Supreme Court recently held that the 2013 amendments to the Minnesota Whistleblower Act (“MWA”) abrogated the requirement that a report be made for the purpose of exposing an illegality in order to be protected under the statute.

On June 30, 2017, Missouri Governor Eric Greitens signed into law Senate Bill 43, which corrects the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA) by bringing it into closer alignment with federal and other states' anti-discrimination statutes.

On December 9, 2016, France enacted a statute broadly granting whistleblower protections to employees. This new law represents the next step in the evolution of such protections in France.

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Administrative Review Board recently issued its highly anticipated decision in Palmer v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, correcting its much-criticized decision in Fordham v. Fannie Mae.