(Judgment In Favor Of Insurer In Connection With Bad Faith Lawsuit Reversed Based On Questions Of Fact Related To Failure To Communicate Settlement Offer Terms To Insured And Unreasonable Claims Handling Conduct)

(Insurer Subrogation Action Against Subcontractors Required Jury Trial To Determine Damages And Such Damages Were Properly Allocated to Breaching Subcontractors On A Several Basis)

Previously, all large employers (those with 250 employees or more) were required to report new hires to a state registry. Florida has now expanded that reporting obligation to all employers regardless of size AND added a reporting requirement for independent contractors. Effective October 1, 2021, all Florida companies must report to the State Directory of New Hires all newly hired or rehired employees, as well as independent contractors, who are paid $600 or more per calendar year for services.

Businesses across the country will soon face challenging new requirements to disclose the presence in their products of, and worker and environmental exposure from, an enormous set of chemicals that have been used for years in products, including cooking pans, furniture and carpets, food wrappers, apparel, paint, automobiles, machinery, and a vast array of other products. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is set to finalize these new regulations soon.

Florida's Proposal For Settlement (PFS) provision was created to encourage early settlement of litigation and is governed by Florida Statute 768.79 and Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442. In Florida, a PFS can be a strategic move that carries financial consequences if rejected.

As previously reported, on October 10, 2019, California enacted AB 51, which prohibited employers from requiring employees to submit to binding agreements that waived “any right, forum or procedure” available under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) and Labor Code for resolving employment-based claims. Labor Code § 432.6 (a). Last week, in a divided 2-1 panel decision, the Ninth Circuit reversed in part the district court’s conclusion that AB 51 is preempted by the FAA and vacated the preliminary injunction, holding that the core of AB 51 – the prohibition of mandatory employment arbitration agreements – is not preempted.