Buyers’ Immunity Under Employment Law Is a Myth

By on July 17, 2019
Posted In Employment

There are three focal points in every successorship case: (1) notice to the purchaser; (2) continuity of the business; and (3) the ability of the seller to provide relief.

Reading the tripartite test for successor liability, it is enticing to conclude that a deal is safe. This is what the Greeks called hubris. Remember Oedipus, who also thought he could escape the prophecy of his fate? Even when it appears one of those factors ought to result in a buyer escaping successorship liability, any reading of those factors needs to be grounded in the case law because it sweeps more than a literal reading of those tripartite factors might suggest.

Even a quick look at the case law reveals the magnitude of the doctrine’s scope.

Access the full article.

Originally published by Law360, July 2019.

Elvira KrasElvira Kras
Elvira Kras focuses her practice on employment litigation and counseling. She defends employers in all stages of litigation including in putative class action and single and multi-plaintiff lawsuits for claims of meal and rest period violations, failure to pay wages and bonuses, off-the-clock work, misclassification, discrimination, retaliation, wrongful termination, trade secret, and breach of contract matters. She advocates for clients in federal and state courts and administrative agencies, including in proceedings before the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, the Public Employment Relations Board, the Division of Labor Enforcement Standards, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the US Department of Labor. Read Elvira Kras's full bio.

STAY CONNECTED

TOPICS

ARCHIVES