The U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury) recently announced yet another delay in the Employer Shared Responsibility (ESR) provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). While this latest suspension in the enforcement of the ESR provisions may lead some employers and insurers to believe that issues regarding the Act can wait, that is simply not the case. Several key aspects of the ACA that took effect on January 1, 2014, impact employers and insurers alike.

Another Victory for Insurers in the Application of the Insured v. Insured Exclusion to Failed Bank Litigation

By Thomas K. Hanekamp, Esq. and Kathryn A. Formeller, Esq. of Tressler LLP

Coverage was unambiguously precluded by an Insured v. Insured exclusion for claims brought by the FDIC against former bank directors despite the insured's arguments concerning industry purpose and ambiguity. BancInsure, Inc. v. McCaffree, No. 12-2110, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24941 (D. Kan. Feb. 27, 2014).

Employer Can Fire Worker Who Refused FMLA Leave for Violating No-Show Policy, Federal Court Rules

By Jamie C. Allen, Esq. and Cynthia Sandoval Esq. of Jackson Lewis P.C.

An employer did not violate the federal Family and Medical Leave Act for terminating an employee for violating its no-show, no-call policy, where the employee elected not to take protected FMLA leave, even though the reason for the employee's need for time off would have been covered under the statute, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in San Francisco, has ruled. Escriba v. Foster Poultry Farms, Inc., Nos. 11-17608 & 12-15320 (9th Cir. Feb. 25, 2014). Affirming a judgment in favor of the employer on the employee's claim for interference with her FMLA rights and rights under California law, the Court also ruled the district court did not err in admitting evidence about the plaintiff's prior FMLA leave.

Engineer Not Liable for Telling Contractor It Would Be Paid for Differing Conditions

By Donald O'Brien, Esq. Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP