Close X
Attorney Spotlight

What colorful method does Claire Miley use to keep up with the latest healthcare regulations as they relate to proposed transactions? Find out more>

Search

Close X

Experience

Search our Experience

Experience Spotlight

On December 1, 2016, Parker Hannifin Corporation and CLARCOR Inc. announced that the companies have entered into a definitive agreement under which Parker will acquire CLARCOR for approximately $4.3 billion in cash, including the assumption of net debt. The transaction has been unanimously approved by the board of directors of each company. Upon closing of the transaction, expected to be completed by or during the first quarter of Parker’s fiscal year 2018, CLARCOR will be combined with Parker’s Filtration Group to form a leading and diverse global filtration business. Bass, Berry & Sims has served CLARCOR as primary corporate and securities counsel for 10 years and served as lead counsel on this transaction. Read more here.

CLARCOR
Close X

Thought Leadership

Enter your search terms in the relevant box(es) below to search for specific Thought Leadership.
To see a recent listing of Thought Leadership, click the blue Search button below.

Thought Leadership Spotlight

Securities Law Exchange BlogSecurities Law Exchange blog offers insight on the latest legal and regulatory developments affecting publicly traded companies. It focuses on a wide variety of topics including regulation and reporting updates, public company advisory topics, IPO readiness and exchange updates including IPO announcements, M&A trends and deal news.

Read More >

Defense of Dialysis Center Company in Discrimination and Retaliation Claim

Client Type: Nonprofit

We won summary judgment for a dialysis center company in a multiple-count lawsuit filed in New Jersey federal court. The plaintiff, a former clinic nurse, alleged race discrimination and retaliation under state and federal law against the company and her manager based upon her alleged mistreatment while employed and her termination within days of reporting her alleged mistreatment. The Court found that the company properly disciplined the plaintiff for failing to wear personal protective equipment while treating a patient as required by company policy. The Court held the plaintiff did not raise an inference of discrimination regarding her discipline through the nine co-workers proffered as comparators whom she claimed were treated more favorably under similar circumstances. As to the retaliation claim, the Court noted that the temporal proximity of her termination to her complaints was insufficient to establish retaliation because the termination resulted from her failure to show up for work or properly call in on the day of her termination. The Court found that the plaintiff could not raise a jury issue on these various claims, in part, because both the plaintiff's personal phone records and the clinic's phone records belied her assertion she attempted to provide notice of her absence in accordance with company policy.

You Also May Be Interested In:

Related Professionals

Related Services

Notice

Visiting, or interacting with, this website does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Although we are always interested in hearing from visitors to our website, we cannot accept representation on a new matter from either existing clients or new clients until we know that we do not have a conflict of interest that would prevent us from doing so. Therefore, please do not send us any information about any new matter that may involve a potential legal representation until we have confirmed that a conflict of interest does not exist and we have expressly agreed in writing to the representation. Until there is such an agreement, we will not be deemed to have given you any advice, any information you send may not be deemed privileged and confidential, and we may be able to represent adverse parties.