Business owners often form entities, in part, to shield their personal assets from their business’ liabilities.  There is a plethora of stories, though, about unsuspecting business owners’ personal assets being subject to the entity’s obligations.  Sometimes this liability comes about through what the law refers to as “piercing the corporate veil.”  Piercing the corporate veil is an interesting doctrine, but its application is for those businesses where its owners commingle business assets with personal assets and are using the business as an alter ego. Business owners can also subject their personal assets to their business’ liabilities by personally guarantying those obligations. 

If you are an employer in the private sector, chances are your employee policies must comply with the rules and regulations established by the National Labor Relation’s Board (“NLRB”) under the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”). What standard the NLRB uses in evaluating employer policies can be the difference between finding that your policies appropriately regulate employee conduct and finding that they violate protected rights. In 2017, the NLRB announced a new standard in Boeing Co. [1] for evaluating whether facially neutral employee policies would be found lawful. The decision in Boeing Co. overruled the NLRB’s prior decision in Lutheran Heritage

On May 21st, the United States Supreme Court released its long awaited decision in the case of Epic Systems Court v. Lewis, consolidated before the court with two other cases in which certiorari had been granted, Ernst & Young, LLP. v. Morris, and National Labor Relations Board v. Murphy Oil USA, Inc. The common issue in all three cases was whether class action waivers in employment agreements that provide for the individual arbitration of claims are invalid under Sections 7 and 8 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which protects the rights of employees to engage in “concerted activity”. The