Author: Bailey Glasser

U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Michigan State University’s Appeal, Allowing Title IX Discrimination Case to Proceed

In a Title IX victory for women student-athletes, BG partners Lori Bullock and Josh Hammack successfully defeated cert in the U.S. Supreme Court after the high court rejected Michigan State University’s petition to review the Sixth Circuit’s ruling. This denial from the U.S. Supreme Court paves the way for the Title IX discrimination suit to proceed for the female swimmers and divers who allege MSU violated Title IX by not providing enough opportunities for women athletes to participate in sports.

Continue reading

In a Title IX victory for women student-athletes, BG partners Lori Bullock and Josh Hammack successfully defeated cert in the U.S. Supreme Court after the high court rejected Michigan State University’s petition to review the Sixth Circuit’s ruling. This denial from the U.S. Supreme Court paves the way for the Title IX discrimination suit to proceed for the female swimmers and divers who allege MSU violated Title IX by not providing enough opportunities for women athletes to participate in sports.

Bailey Glasser Lends A Helping Hand To A DC Entrepreneur

Congratulations to DC entrepreneur Skyler Kelley for securing lease rights to open a new Brij Coffeehouse kiosk at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center in Washington, D.C. Drawing upon her lived experience as an unhoused single mother, Skyler’s vision includes reinvesting a portion of Brij’s earnings in the community through nonprofits that help neighbors in need. Skyler is passionate about eradicating homelessness and bridging gaps among D.C.’s diverse community. Bailey Glasser attorneys Kurt Gleeson, Michael Murphy, Lorren Patterson, and Greg Payton were delighted to work with Skyler on a pro bono basis to secure the lease and handle several corporate organizational matters for her company.

Continue reading

Congratulations to DC entrepreneur Skyler Kelley for securing lease rights to open a new Brij Coffeehouse kiosk at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center in Washington, D.C. Drawing upon her lived experience as an unhoused single mother, Skyler’s vision includes reinvesting a portion of Brij’s earnings in the community through nonprofits that help neighbors in need. Skyler is passionate about eradicating homelessness and bridging gaps among D.C.’s diverse community. Bailey Glasser attorneys Kurt Gleeson, Michael Murphy, Lorren Patterson, and Greg Payton were delighted to work with Skyler on a pro bono basis to secure the lease and handle several corporate organizational matters for her company.

New Non-Compete Legislation Takes Effect in D.C.

Washington, D.C.’s new non-compete law, the “Non-Compete Clarification Amendment Act of 2022” (the “Amended Act”) went into effect last month. As of October 1, 2022, employers operating in the District of Columbia are prohibited from using most non-compete provisions, with key exceptions. The Amendment Act is not retroactive: non-competition agreements predating October 1, 2022, are not affected, although employers may still want to review such non-compete provisions with their legal counsel.

Continue reading

By J. Jeffrey Craven, Michael de León Hawthorne, and Abraham B. Reiss

Introduction and Background

Washington, D.C.’s new non-compete law, the “Non-Compete Clarification Amendment Act of 2022” (the “Amended Act”) went into effect last month. As of October 1, 2022, employers operating in the District of Columbia are prohibited from using most non-compete provisions, with key exceptions. The Amendment Act is not retroactive: non-competition agreements predating October 1, 2022, are not affected, although employers may still want to review such non-compete provisions with their legal counsel.

The new legislation represents a toned-down version of the “Ban on Non-Compete Agreements Amendment Act of 2020,” an outright ban on non-competes covering nearly all D.C. employees, passed by the city council in December 2020. The 2020 ban, which became law in January 2021, would have constituted one of the most employee-friendly non-compete laws in the country. However, significant backlash from D.C. business interests effectively pressured the city council to delay its implementation and draft a more modest version of the law. On June 12, 2022, the council passed the Amended Act, which includes important employer-friendly exemptions that had been requested by the D.C. business lobby.

Covered and Exempted Employees

All current and prospective non-governmental employers in D.C. are prohibited from using non-compete language in agreements with their “covered employees.” Covered employees are defined as workers who do not qualify as “highly compensated” (discussed below) and either spend more than 50% of their work time for their employer in the District or spend a “substantial amount” of their work time in D.C. and not more than 50% in another jurisdiction. Both remote and in-person employees qualify, as well as newly hired employees who have yet to begin working, provided an employer can reasonably anticipate that they will spend most of their work time in D.C.

Employers may use non-compete restrictions for their “highly compensated” employees, defined as those whose total annual compensation, including wages or salaries as well as bonuses, commissions, vested stock, and overtime pay, exceeds $150,000. For medical specialists, the minimum qualifying annual compensation is $250,000. However, non-competes for these employees must clearly stipulate any geographic limitations and the length of time covered after separation is capped at 1 year (2 years for medical specialists). “Broadcast employees” do not qualify as highly compensated, regardless of what they earn and are defined by the Amended Act as any “on or off-air creator (such as an anchor, disc jockey, editor, producer, program host, reporter, or writer)” working at any D.C. station or network that provides broadcast services. Minimum qualifying annual compensation values will be adjusted based on the local Consumer Price Index beginning on January 1, 2024.

The new law also includes an anti-moonlighting provision allowing employers to restrict employees who also work simultaneous, separate employment. Employers may use non-compete provisions for such simultaneous employment when they “reasonably believe” that their employee’s second job would result in a conflict of interest, disclosure of confidential information, or the breach of industry rules or local or federal laws and regulations. The legislation also permits non-competition provisions in the context of long-term incentive agreements in which employers award bonuses, equity, and/or stock as performance-based rewards.

In some professions, governing associations already bar the use of non-competes. For instance, the ethics rules of the American Bar Association (ABA) prohibit non-competition clauses in agreements among attorneys.

Read more

Brown University Agrees to Pay Over $1 Million in Title IX Case for Female Athletes’ Costs and Attorneys’ Fees

U.S. District Court Chief Judge John McConnell, Jr., approved a stipulated order in Cohen v. Brown University, the landmark Title IX case, requiring Brown University to pay $1,135,000 for the attorneys’ fees and $40,000 for the litigation expenses incurred by the class of women student-athletes who challenged the school’s elimination of women’s teams from its varsity intercollegiate athletics program in June 2020.

Continue reading

U.S. District Court Chief Judge John McConnell, Jr., approved a stipulated order in Cohen v. Brown University, the landmark Title IX case, requiring Brown University to pay $1,135,000 for the attorneys’ fees and $40,000 for the litigation expenses incurred by the class of women student-athletes who challenged the school’s elimination of women’s teams from its varsity intercollegiate athletics program in June 2020.

“This order should send a message to schools nationwide,” said partner Arthur Bryant of Bailey & Glasser, LLP, class counsel for the women. “Title IX is the law. It prohibits sex discrimination. If schools violate Title IX, they will pay. If schools violate Title IX, refuse to admit it, and fight in the courts, they will pay more. And they’ll still have to comply with the law.”

Class counsel Lynette Labinger, cooperating counsel for the ACLU Foundation of Rhode Island, said, “Countless women locally and nationally have benefitted from the efforts of the women at Brown who have championed this case over three decades through to its current conclusion. We hope that this substantial award, coming after the restoration of two of the women’s teams and the obligation to cut no more, will send a message to all colleges and universities in Rhode Island and elsewhere to carefully examine their athletic programs, renew their commitment to ensure that their women athletes are being treated fairly and equitably, and to recognize that decisions to cut programs to save money may prove more costly than the projected savings themselves.”

In 1992, women student-athletes successfully sued Brown for denying them athletic opportunities provided to Brown’s men, resulting in several precedent-setting decisions that held the school accountable for violating Title IX by depriving women of equal opportunities to participate, and a 1998 consent decree mandating compliance with that law. In 2020, the plaintiff class returned to court, charging that the elimination of five women’s teams violated the 1998 consent decree.

Read on…

Bailey Glasser Named to National and Regional “Best Law Firms in America” Lists

We are pleased to announce that we have been listed by U.S. News & World Report’s 2023 Best Law Firms in America on both national and regional tiers. The U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” rankings are based on an evaluation process that includes client and lawyer evaluations, peer reviews from other leading attorneys, and review of additional information provided by law firms as part of the formal submission process.

Continue reading

We are pleased to announce that we have been listed by U.S. News & World Report’s 2023 Best Law Firms in America on both national and regional tiers.

The U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” rankings are based on an evaluation process that includes client and lawyer evaluations, peer reviews from other leading attorneys, and review of additional information provided by law firms as part of the formal submission process. The 2023 rankings incorporate more than 12.2 million evaluations of more than 115,000 individual leading lawyers from more than 22,000 firms.

According to Best Law Firms: “Achieving a tiered ranking in U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” signals a unique combination of quality law practice and breadth of legal expertise. Ranked firms, presented in three tiers, are recognized on a national and regional-based scale. Firms that received a tier designation reflect the highest level of respect a firm can earn among other leading lawyers and clients from the same communities and practice areas.”

A complete look at BG’s 2023 rankings can be found here.