Gregory F. McGroarty

Of Counsel

gregory.mcgroarty@wilsonelser.com

Madison, NJ p. 973.735.5779

Panelist, “Combatting Plaintiff’s Trial Tactics,” New Jersey Defense Association Annual Convention, 2025

Panelist, “Strategies in Response to the Tidal Wave of Future Medical Expense Claim,” New Jersey Defense Association Annual Convention, 2025

Panelist, “Insurance Law Trends and Strategies,” New Jersey State Bar Association, 2022

“Opening and Closings to Defend a Civil Case,” New Jersey Defense Association Annual Convention, 2021

Moderator, New Jersey Defense Association Medical College, 2019

Moderator, New Jersey Defense Association Medical College, 2018

“Handling a Claim from Receipt of the Claim to Filing the Answer to the Complaint,” Brennan /Vanderbilt Inn of Court, 2015

“What’s Boardable? Analysis of the Current Law in the Context of an Automobile Trial,” Automobile Liability Seminar, New Jersey Defense Association/ICNJ, 2012

“The Nuts and Bolts of Special Civil Division,” New Jersey Defense Association Annual Convention, 2008

Panelist, “Combatting Plaintiff’s Trial Tactics,” New Jersey Defense Association Annual Convention, 2025

Panelist, “Strategies in Response to the Tidal Wave of Future Medical Expense Claim,” New Jersey Defense Association Annual Convention, 2025

Panelist, “Insurance Law Trends and Strategies,” New Jersey State Bar Association, 2022

“Opening and Closings to Defend a Civil Case,” New Jersey Defense Association Annual Convention, 2021

Moderator, New Jersey Defense Association Medical College, 2019

Moderator, New Jersey Defense Association Medical College, 2018

“Handling a Claim from Receipt of the Claim to Filing the Answer to the Complaint,” Brennan /Vanderbilt Inn of Court, 2015

“What’s Boardable? Analysis of the Current Law in the Context of an Automobile Trial,” Automobile Liability Seminar, New Jersey Defense Association/ICNJ, 2012

“The Nuts and Bolts of Special Civil Division,” New Jersey Defense Association Annual Convention, 2008

Panelist, “Combatting Plaintiff’s Trial Tactics,” New Jersey Defense Association Annual Convention, 2025

Panelist, “Strategies in Response to the Tidal Wave of Future Medical Expense Claim,” New Jersey Defense Association Annual Convention, 2025

Panelist, “Insurance Law Trends and Strategies,” New Jersey State Bar Association, 2022

“Opening and Closings to Defend a Civil Case,” New Jersey Defense Association Annual Convention, 2021

Moderator, New Jersey Defense Association Medical College, 2019

Moderator, New Jersey Defense Association Medical College, 2018

“Handling a Claim from Receipt of the Claim to Filing the Answer to the Complaint,” Brennan /Vanderbilt Inn of Court, 2015

“What’s Boardable? Analysis of the Current Law in the Context of an Automobile Trial,” Automobile Liability Seminar, New Jersey Defense Association/ICNJ, 2012

“The Nuts and Bolts of Special Civil Division,” New Jersey Defense Association Annual Convention, 2008

Panelist, “Combatting Plaintiff’s Trial Tactics,” New Jersey Defense Association Annual Convention, 2025

Panelist, “Strategies in Response to the Tidal Wave of Future Medical Expense Claim,” New Jersey Defense Association Annual Convention, 2025

Panelist, “Insurance Law Trends and Strategies,” New Jersey State Bar Association, 2022

“Opening and Closings to Defend a Civil Case,” New Jersey Defense Association Annual Convention, 2021

Moderator, New Jersey Defense Association Medical College, 2019

Moderator, New Jersey Defense Association Medical College, 2018

“Handling a Claim from Receipt of the Claim to Filing the Answer to the Complaint,” Brennan /Vanderbilt Inn of Court, 2015

“What’s Boardable? Analysis of the Current Law in the Context of an Automobile Trial,” Automobile Liability Seminar, New Jersey Defense Association/ICNJ, 2012

“The Nuts and Bolts of Special Civil Division,” New Jersey Defense Association Annual Convention, 2008

Firm Highlights

News
Nelson Appointed to Las Vegas Defense Lawyers Board of Directors
Kimberly Nelson (Associate-Las Vegas) has been appointed to the Board of Directors for the Las Vegas Defense Lawyers (LVDL) organization, where she’ll serve a two-year term. LVDL is an affinity bar for local civil defense lawyers. It provides a forum for professional development and mutual education through the exchange of ideas among counsel practicing in Las Vegas and throughout Clark County. LVDL is also committed to promoting cooperation, professionalism, and civility within the legal community while enhancing its members' skills and effectiveness.
Read more

Publications
Daily Journal Features Article by Gay on Money Laundering Fundamentals, Detection, and Regulation
William Tolin Gay (Of Counsel-Los Angeles) authored “Introduction to Money Laundering: What It Is, How to Spot It,” appearing in the April 8, 2026, edition of the Daily Journal. The article provides an overview of money laundering: “the process of disguising illicit funds to make them appear legitimate.” Bill outlines the classic three-stage framework for money laundering – placement, layering, and integration – and emphasizes that these stages can occur through financial institutions, shell companies, real estate transactions, and other seemingly lawful channels. He discusses the components of the layering stage, “the separation of illicit proceeds from their source by creating complex financial transactions,” providing examples of specific areas susceptible to money laundering schemes. Also examined are regulatory scrutiny under U.S. anti-money laundering laws, such as the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and the Money Laundering Control Act (MLCA); the role of international cooperation in combating money laundering; and how lawyers can avoid legal and reputational risk by implementing strategic compliance measures related to their client trust accounts.
Read more

Events
The Changing Nature of Defending Class Actions in 2026
Matthew Foree (Of Counsel-Atlanta, GA) will present the Wilson Elser Forum webinar “The Changing Nature of Defending Class Actions in 2026” on April 21, 2026. This session examines the trends, judicial shifts, and emerging risks shaping class action defense in 2026. Matt will discuss how technology and recent rule and case-filing changes are transforming defense strategy, explore new approaches for managing exposure and leverage, and offer practical tactics for navigating a faster, more outcome- and data-driven litigation environment.
Read more

News
Campos Named to Law360’s 2026 Personal Injury & Medical Malpractice Editorial Board
Victor M. Campos (Of Counsel-Los Angeles) has been selected to serve on Law360’s 2026 Personal Injury & Medical Malpractice Editorial Board, the exciting news delivered on March 24, 2026. Members of the Personal Injury & Medical Malpractice Editorial Board are chosen for their experience in the field, and Victor will contribute by offering his perspective on important legal developments, identifying emerging trends, and helping to guide the publication’s coverage of personal injury and medical malpractice issues. An accomplished litigator, Victor is well-versed in defending against personal injury claims, adeptly handling matters from inception through trial.
Read more

Events
No Harm, But Still a Foul? Defending No-Injury Class Actions After LabCorp
David Ross (Partner-Washington, DC) will present the seminar "No Harm, But Still a Foul? Defending No-Injury Class Actions After LabCorp" at the 2026 DRI Business and Intellectual Property Litigation Super Conference, to be held April 15–17, 2026, in Miami, Florida. Defendants increasingly face class actions premised on conduct that caused no actual injury – ranging from alleged product defects that never manifested to data breaches in which implicated information was neither used for identity theft nor fraud, nor exposed on the dark web. After the Supreme Court granted and then dismissed review in Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings v. Davis, uncertainty remains about certifying classes that include members who lack Article III standing. David explores the current legal landscape for no-injury class actions and offers practical defense strategies, including standing challenges and constitutional arguments against awarding damages to unharmed class members.
Read more

Client Wins
Suarez and Restrepo Secure Full Dismissal for Global Resort Group in Third-Party Liability Case
Tanya Suarez (Partner-Miami) and Michael Restrepo (Associate-Miami, FL) secured a complete dismissal of all claims in the Miami-Dade County Circuit Court on behalf of Wilson Elser’s clients, a global resort group and its resort property located in the Bahamas. This complex third-party action arose from an alleged recreational vehicle accident near the resort’s security gate. The third-party plaintiff alleged negligence claims against our clients, alleging that inadequate roadway lighting contributed to the accident.
	
	Tanya and Michael engaged in extensive motion practice, submitting more than 500 pages of briefing. The team moved to dismiss plaintiff’s claims on multiple grounds, including expiration of the statute of limitations, failure to state a cause of action, and forum non conveniens. After nearly two hours of oral argument, the court granted the motion in full. The court agreed with Tanya and Michael’s arguments and found the statute of limitations issue to be dispositive, ruling that the claims were time-barred and untimely under Florida law, while also considering the Bahamian statute of limitations issues raised in the briefing. In light of this ruling, the court did not reach the remaining arguments, including forum non conveniens, which had previously been raised by the third-party plaintiffs (Florida residents), denied by the trial court, and affirmed on appeal in the original action, before our client’s involvement as a third-party defendant.
Read more

Publications
Law360 Features Meer and Sekerka Article Analyzing EEOC Subpoena Powers Amid Renewed Enforcement Focus​
Jonathan Meer (Partner-New York, NY) and Angela Sekerka (Of Counsel-Chicago, IL/White Plains, NY) coauthored “Spotlight on Legal Battles Over EEOC Subpoena Powers,” appearing in the March 31, 2026, posting of Law360’s Expert Analysis. The article explores how recent enforcement priorities announced by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) – including a focus on religious discrimination and diversity, equity, and inclusion-related investigations – have renewed scrutiny regarding the breadth of its statutory subpoena authority and raised difficult questions for employers regarding the scope of employee information subject to exposure. Jonathan and Angela examine recent litigation and key rulings shaping the scope of the EEOC’s subpoena powers and discuss cases driving new challenges to that authority, including those involving workplace DEI practices and university-related religious discrimination investigations. They observe, “In sum, employers can expect that the EEOC will continue to vigorously pursue its articulated priorities of rooting out antisemitism on university campuses and identifying and eliminating DEI-related discrimination.” The authors further note that “Until these issues are resolved, employers should remember that the EEOC's investigatory and subpoena powers are broad but not unlimited. Employers frustrated with broad requests may be able to challenge subpoenas based on the laws and the constitution of the states in which actions are brought.”
Read more

Events
Building a Successful Defense Team: Beyond Trial Counsel
Lori Semlies (Partner-White Plains, NY), cochair of Wilson Elser’s Medical Malpractice and Health Care Practice, will present on the panel “Building a Successful Defense Team: Beyond Trial Counsel” at the Crittenden Medical Liability Conference, to be held April 15-17, 2026, in Savannah, Georgia. Drawing on de-identified case scenarios, the panel will discuss how coordinated defense teams manage high-value medical claims, addressing early motion practice, damages assessment, mediation strategies, and trial considerations. Crittenden’s annual conference brings out over 500 medical insurance professionals, including risk managers, underwriters, insurance executives, and prominent attorneys in the medical liability field.
Read more

Publications
Employment Tip of the Month – April 2026
Q: What should employers know about the new amendments to the New York Fair Credit Reporting Act?

A: Beginning on April 18, 2026, employers in New York, with few limited exceptions, will be barred from obtaining or using an individual’s credit score or consumer credit history during or after hiring of an employee. Specifically, Governor Kathy Hochul has made it an “unlawful discriminatory practice” for an employer or prospective employer to use a candidate or employee credit score for any employment purpose, and it is an unlawful discriminatory practice to even request a credit score from the relevant individuals. 

If I am hiring for a position requiring financial trust and skill, are there exceptions I can use?
	The amendments to the New York Fair Credit Reporting Act also include several relevant exceptions for employers that include:

Persons in a non-clerical position who have regular access to trade secrets,1 intelligence information, or national security information
	Persons in a position with: (A) Signatory authority over third-party funds or assets valued at $10,000 or more
			(B) Fiduciary responsibility to the employer with authority to enter financial agreements valued at $10,000 or more on behalf of the employer
		
	


For employers that wish to continue using credit scores, the law provides only limited and narrowly-defined exceptions for employees who do not fall within the categories above, such as:

An employer that is required under state or federal law, or self-regulatory organization2, to use an individual’s consumer credit history for employment purposes
	Candidates and current employees serving as peace officers, police officers, and similarly-situated positions in law enforcement and investigation
	Persons in an appointed position bearing a high degree of public trust who are subject to background investigations by a state agency
	Persons in a position that requires bonding under state or federal law
	Persons in a position requiring a security clearance under state or federal law
	Persons in a position whose regular duties include modifying digital security systems


How do these restrictions apply to indirect credit checks conducted through a credit agency? What if an employer voluntarily provides their credit information?
	The amendments are clear: employers cannot, except under the enumerated exceptions listed above, use an individual’s credit score for any employment purposes. Consumer reporting agencies are barred from providing reports about employees that contain information bearing on a consumer’s credit worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, or credit history. In other words, consumer credit agencies cannot provide employers with an individual’s credit report. Further, employers are specifically barred from using any information directly obtained from an individual regarding their consumer credit history. 

How do these amendments relate and compare to New York City’s credit check ban?
	On September 3, 2015, the Stop Credit Discrimination in Employment Act (SCDEA) went into effect in New York City and largely covers the same topics as the new state law amendments. In fact, the SCDEA and state law amendments are strikingly similar, but the SCDEA is likely harsher and narrower than its state law counterpart. For example, the SCDEA narrows the $10,000 exemption by construing it to be generally limited to executive-level employees, such as chief financial officer or chief operating officer. Similarly, the digital systems exemption is narrowed to executives who control complete access to a company’s computer systems. Given that city discrimination protections are generally considered to be broader than their state law mirrors, it is no surprise that city law is narrower and harsher than state law in this domain.

How should employers move forward?
	Employment and labor laws are ever evolving and changing, demanding that employers stay on the cutting edge to adapt before running afoul of these amendments. For employers who already operate alongside the SCDEA, these state amendments will change almost nothing. Employers should make concerted efforts to avoid asking credit-related questions in interviews and in office, continue to construe all the above exemptions narrowly, and keep records of exemptions for at least five years. For employers not covered by the SCDEA that will now be covered by the state amendments, these same steps will be key to assuring compliance. 

These new amendments make for an opportune time for employers to take a moment and assess whether they are up-to-date and in compliance with the most recent changes to New York state employment law. Employers that currently use consumer credit history for any employment purposes, whether in hiring or in day-to-day operations, need to make sure that the individual falls under the proper narrowly-defined exemption, keep accurate records of the exemption for at least five years to be safe, and assure that any usage of consumer credit history outside of these exemptions has ceased.
	_____________________________________________________________________________________________

1 “Trade secrets” means information that: (A) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use; (B) is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy; and (C) can reasonably be said to be the end product of significant innovation. The term “trade secrets” does not include general proprietary company information such as handbooks and policies. The term “regular access to trade secrets” does not include access to or the use of client, customer or mailing lists.

2 FINRA (“Financial Industry Regulatory Authority”) is considered a common example of a self-regulatory agency which may be exempt. 
Read more

Client Wins
Thome and Mangano Prevail in Non-Payment Dispute
Sheri Thome (Partner-Las Vegas) and Shawn Mangano (Of Counsel-Las Vegas) represented a lawyer who was sued for malpractice for failing to prepare adequate damages disclosures before withdrawing from a commercial case for non-payment. Substitute counsel undertook representation and provided supplemental damage disclosures the day before the close of discovery. The disclosures were inadequate, and were made more than eight months after our client had withdrawn.  The court eventually granted a motion in limine that included a finding that new counsel had willfully violated disclosure obligations, thereby justifying claim-terminating sanctions. Subsequently, the former client filed separate lawsuits against both firms. Our client moved for summary judgment on causation, arguing that substitute counsel – and not our client – was responsible for any damages incurred by the plaintiff by virtue of the court ruling on the motion in limine. At oral argument, the Court granted summary judgment in our client's favor.
Read more

Events
The Changing Nature of Defending Class Actions in 2026
Matthew Foree (Of Counsel-Atlanta, GA) will present the Wilson Elser Forum webinar “The Changing Nature of Defending Class Actions in 2026” on April 21, 2026. This session examines the trends, judicial shifts, and emerging risks shaping class action defense in 2026. Matt will discuss how technology and recent rule and case-filing changes are transforming defense strategy, explore new approaches for managing exposure and leverage, and offer practical tactics for navigating a faster, more outcome- and data-driven litigation environment.
Read more

Publications
Daily Journal Features Article by Gay on Money Laundering Fundamentals, Detection, and Regulation
William Tolin Gay (Of Counsel-Los Angeles) authored “Introduction to Money Laundering: What It Is, How to Spot It,” appearing in the April 8, 2026, edition of the Daily Journal. The article provides an overview of money laundering: “the process of disguising illicit funds to make them appear legitimate.” Bill outlines the classic three-stage framework for money laundering – placement, layering, and integration – and emphasizes that these stages can occur through financial institutions, shell companies, real estate transactions, and other seemingly lawful channels. He discusses the components of the layering stage, “the separation of illicit proceeds from their source by creating complex financial transactions,” providing examples of specific areas susceptible to money laundering schemes. Also examined are regulatory scrutiny under U.S. anti-money laundering laws, such as the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and the Money Laundering Control Act (MLCA); the role of international cooperation in combating money laundering; and how lawyers can avoid legal and reputational risk by implementing strategic compliance measures related to their client trust accounts.
Read more

News
Nelson Appointed to Las Vegas Defense Lawyers Board of Directors
Kimberly Nelson (Associate-Las Vegas) has been appointed to the Board of Directors for the Las Vegas Defense Lawyers (LVDL) organization, where she’ll serve a two-year term. LVDL is an affinity bar for local civil defense lawyers. It provides a forum for professional development and mutual education through the exchange of ideas among counsel practicing in Las Vegas and throughout Clark County. LVDL is also committed to promoting cooperation, professionalism, and civility within the legal community while enhancing its members' skills and effectiveness.
Read more

News
Campos Named to Law360’s 2026 Personal Injury & Medical Malpractice Editorial Board
Victor M. Campos (Of Counsel-Los Angeles) has been selected to serve on Law360’s 2026 Personal Injury & Medical Malpractice Editorial Board, the exciting news delivered on March 24, 2026. Members of the Personal Injury & Medical Malpractice Editorial Board are chosen for their experience in the field, and Victor will contribute by offering his perspective on important legal developments, identifying emerging trends, and helping to guide the publication’s coverage of personal injury and medical malpractice issues. An accomplished litigator, Victor is well-versed in defending against personal injury claims, adeptly handling matters from inception through trial.
Read more

Events
No Harm, But Still a Foul? Defending No-Injury Class Actions After LabCorp
David Ross (Partner-Washington, DC) will present the seminar "No Harm, But Still a Foul? Defending No-Injury Class Actions After LabCorp" at the 2026 DRI Business and Intellectual Property Litigation Super Conference, to be held April 15–17, 2026, in Miami, Florida. Defendants increasingly face class actions premised on conduct that caused no actual injury – ranging from alleged product defects that never manifested to data breaches in which implicated information was neither used for identity theft nor fraud, nor exposed on the dark web. After the Supreme Court granted and then dismissed review in Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings v. Davis, uncertainty remains about certifying classes that include members who lack Article III standing. David explores the current legal landscape for no-injury class actions and offers practical defense strategies, including standing challenges and constitutional arguments against awarding damages to unharmed class members.
Read more

Client Wins
Suarez and Restrepo Secure Full Dismissal for Global Resort Group in Third-Party Liability Case
Tanya Suarez (Partner-Miami) and Michael Restrepo (Associate-Miami, FL) secured a complete dismissal of all claims in the Miami-Dade County Circuit Court on behalf of Wilson Elser’s clients, a global resort group and its resort property located in the Bahamas. This complex third-party action arose from an alleged recreational vehicle accident near the resort’s security gate. The third-party plaintiff alleged negligence claims against our clients, alleging that inadequate roadway lighting contributed to the accident.
	
	Tanya and Michael engaged in extensive motion practice, submitting more than 500 pages of briefing. The team moved to dismiss plaintiff’s claims on multiple grounds, including expiration of the statute of limitations, failure to state a cause of action, and forum non conveniens. After nearly two hours of oral argument, the court granted the motion in full. The court agreed with Tanya and Michael’s arguments and found the statute of limitations issue to be dispositive, ruling that the claims were time-barred and untimely under Florida law, while also considering the Bahamian statute of limitations issues raised in the briefing. In light of this ruling, the court did not reach the remaining arguments, including forum non conveniens, which had previously been raised by the third-party plaintiffs (Florida residents), denied by the trial court, and affirmed on appeal in the original action, before our client’s involvement as a third-party defendant.
Read more

Publications
Law360 Features Meer and Sekerka Article Analyzing EEOC Subpoena Powers Amid Renewed Enforcement Focus​
Jonathan Meer (Partner-New York, NY) and Angela Sekerka (Of Counsel-Chicago, IL/White Plains, NY) coauthored “Spotlight on Legal Battles Over EEOC Subpoena Powers,” appearing in the March 31, 2026, posting of Law360’s Expert Analysis. The article explores how recent enforcement priorities announced by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) – including a focus on religious discrimination and diversity, equity, and inclusion-related investigations – have renewed scrutiny regarding the breadth of its statutory subpoena authority and raised difficult questions for employers regarding the scope of employee information subject to exposure. Jonathan and Angela examine recent litigation and key rulings shaping the scope of the EEOC’s subpoena powers and discuss cases driving new challenges to that authority, including those involving workplace DEI practices and university-related religious discrimination investigations. They observe, “In sum, employers can expect that the EEOC will continue to vigorously pursue its articulated priorities of rooting out antisemitism on university campuses and identifying and eliminating DEI-related discrimination.” The authors further note that “Until these issues are resolved, employers should remember that the EEOC's investigatory and subpoena powers are broad but not unlimited. Employers frustrated with broad requests may be able to challenge subpoenas based on the laws and the constitution of the states in which actions are brought.”
Read more

Events
Building a Successful Defense Team: Beyond Trial Counsel
Lori Semlies (Partner-White Plains, NY), cochair of Wilson Elser’s Medical Malpractice and Health Care Practice, will present on the panel “Building a Successful Defense Team: Beyond Trial Counsel” at the Crittenden Medical Liability Conference, to be held April 15-17, 2026, in Savannah, Georgia. Drawing on de-identified case scenarios, the panel will discuss how coordinated defense teams manage high-value medical claims, addressing early motion practice, damages assessment, mediation strategies, and trial considerations. Crittenden’s annual conference brings out over 500 medical insurance professionals, including risk managers, underwriters, insurance executives, and prominent attorneys in the medical liability field.
Read more

Publications
Employment Tip of the Month – April 2026
Q: What should employers know about the new amendments to the New York Fair Credit Reporting Act?

A: Beginning on April 18, 2026, employers in New York, with few limited exceptions, will be barred from obtaining or using an individual’s credit score or consumer credit history during or after hiring of an employee. Specifically, Governor Kathy Hochul has made it an “unlawful discriminatory practice” for an employer or prospective employer to use a candidate or employee credit score for any employment purpose, and it is an unlawful discriminatory practice to even request a credit score from the relevant individuals. 

If I am hiring for a position requiring financial trust and skill, are there exceptions I can use?
	The amendments to the New York Fair Credit Reporting Act also include several relevant exceptions for employers that include:

Persons in a non-clerical position who have regular access to trade secrets,1 intelligence information, or national security information
	Persons in a position with: (A) Signatory authority over third-party funds or assets valued at $10,000 or more
			(B) Fiduciary responsibility to the employer with authority to enter financial agreements valued at $10,000 or more on behalf of the employer
		
	


For employers that wish to continue using credit scores, the law provides only limited and narrowly-defined exceptions for employees who do not fall within the categories above, such as:

An employer that is required under state or federal law, or self-regulatory organization2, to use an individual’s consumer credit history for employment purposes
	Candidates and current employees serving as peace officers, police officers, and similarly-situated positions in law enforcement and investigation
	Persons in an appointed position bearing a high degree of public trust who are subject to background investigations by a state agency
	Persons in a position that requires bonding under state or federal law
	Persons in a position requiring a security clearance under state or federal law
	Persons in a position whose regular duties include modifying digital security systems


How do these restrictions apply to indirect credit checks conducted through a credit agency? What if an employer voluntarily provides their credit information?
	The amendments are clear: employers cannot, except under the enumerated exceptions listed above, use an individual’s credit score for any employment purposes. Consumer reporting agencies are barred from providing reports about employees that contain information bearing on a consumer’s credit worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, or credit history. In other words, consumer credit agencies cannot provide employers with an individual’s credit report. Further, employers are specifically barred from using any information directly obtained from an individual regarding their consumer credit history. 

How do these amendments relate and compare to New York City’s credit check ban?
	On September 3, 2015, the Stop Credit Discrimination in Employment Act (SCDEA) went into effect in New York City and largely covers the same topics as the new state law amendments. In fact, the SCDEA and state law amendments are strikingly similar, but the SCDEA is likely harsher and narrower than its state law counterpart. For example, the SCDEA narrows the $10,000 exemption by construing it to be generally limited to executive-level employees, such as chief financial officer or chief operating officer. Similarly, the digital systems exemption is narrowed to executives who control complete access to a company’s computer systems. Given that city discrimination protections are generally considered to be broader than their state law mirrors, it is no surprise that city law is narrower and harsher than state law in this domain.

How should employers move forward?
	Employment and labor laws are ever evolving and changing, demanding that employers stay on the cutting edge to adapt before running afoul of these amendments. For employers who already operate alongside the SCDEA, these state amendments will change almost nothing. Employers should make concerted efforts to avoid asking credit-related questions in interviews and in office, continue to construe all the above exemptions narrowly, and keep records of exemptions for at least five years. For employers not covered by the SCDEA that will now be covered by the state amendments, these same steps will be key to assuring compliance. 

These new amendments make for an opportune time for employers to take a moment and assess whether they are up-to-date and in compliance with the most recent changes to New York state employment law. Employers that currently use consumer credit history for any employment purposes, whether in hiring or in day-to-day operations, need to make sure that the individual falls under the proper narrowly-defined exemption, keep accurate records of the exemption for at least five years to be safe, and assure that any usage of consumer credit history outside of these exemptions has ceased.
	_____________________________________________________________________________________________

1 “Trade secrets” means information that: (A) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use; (B) is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy; and (C) can reasonably be said to be the end product of significant innovation. The term “trade secrets” does not include general proprietary company information such as handbooks and policies. The term “regular access to trade secrets” does not include access to or the use of client, customer or mailing lists.

2 FINRA (“Financial Industry Regulatory Authority”) is considered a common example of a self-regulatory agency which may be exempt. 
Read more

Client Wins
Thome and Mangano Prevail in Non-Payment Dispute
Sheri Thome (Partner-Las Vegas) and Shawn Mangano (Of Counsel-Las Vegas) represented a lawyer who was sued for malpractice for failing to prepare adequate damages disclosures before withdrawing from a commercial case for non-payment. Substitute counsel undertook representation and provided supplemental damage disclosures the day before the close of discovery. The disclosures were inadequate, and were made more than eight months after our client had withdrawn.  The court eventually granted a motion in limine that included a finding that new counsel had willfully violated disclosure obligations, thereby justifying claim-terminating sanctions. Subsequently, the former client filed separate lawsuits against both firms. Our client moved for summary judgment on causation, arguing that substitute counsel – and not our client – was responsible for any damages incurred by the plaintiff by virtue of the court ruling on the motion in limine. At oral argument, the Court granted summary judgment in our client's favor.
Read more

Events
The Changing Nature of Defending Class Actions in 2026
Matthew Foree (Of Counsel-Atlanta, GA) will present the Wilson Elser Forum webinar “The Changing Nature of Defending Class Actions in 2026” on April 21, 2026. This session examines the trends, judicial shifts, and emerging risks shaping class action defense in 2026. Matt will discuss how technology and recent rule and case-filing changes are transforming defense strategy, explore new approaches for managing exposure and leverage, and offer practical tactics for navigating a faster, more outcome- and data-driven litigation environment.
Read more

Publications
Daily Journal Features Article by Gay on Money Laundering Fundamentals, Detection, and Regulation
William Tolin Gay (Of Counsel-Los Angeles) authored “Introduction to Money Laundering: What It Is, How to Spot It,” appearing in the April 8, 2026, edition of the Daily Journal. The article provides an overview of money laundering: “the process of disguising illicit funds to make them appear legitimate.” Bill outlines the classic three-stage framework for money laundering – placement, layering, and integration – and emphasizes that these stages can occur through financial institutions, shell companies, real estate transactions, and other seemingly lawful channels. He discusses the components of the layering stage, “the separation of illicit proceeds from their source by creating complex financial transactions,” providing examples of specific areas susceptible to money laundering schemes. Also examined are regulatory scrutiny under U.S. anti-money laundering laws, such as the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and the Money Laundering Control Act (MLCA); the role of international cooperation in combating money laundering; and how lawyers can avoid legal and reputational risk by implementing strategic compliance measures related to their client trust accounts.
Read more

News
Nelson Appointed to Las Vegas Defense Lawyers Board of Directors
Kimberly Nelson (Associate-Las Vegas) has been appointed to the Board of Directors for the Las Vegas Defense Lawyers (LVDL) organization, where she’ll serve a two-year term. LVDL is an affinity bar for local civil defense lawyers. It provides a forum for professional development and mutual education through the exchange of ideas among counsel practicing in Las Vegas and throughout Clark County. LVDL is also committed to promoting cooperation, professionalism, and civility within the legal community while enhancing its members' skills and effectiveness.
Read more

News
Campos Named to Law360’s 2026 Personal Injury & Medical Malpractice Editorial Board
Victor M. Campos (Of Counsel-Los Angeles) has been selected to serve on Law360’s 2026 Personal Injury & Medical Malpractice Editorial Board, the exciting news delivered on March 24, 2026. Members of the Personal Injury & Medical Malpractice Editorial Board are chosen for their experience in the field, and Victor will contribute by offering his perspective on important legal developments, identifying emerging trends, and helping to guide the publication’s coverage of personal injury and medical malpractice issues. An accomplished litigator, Victor is well-versed in defending against personal injury claims, adeptly handling matters from inception through trial.
Read more

Events
No Harm, But Still a Foul? Defending No-Injury Class Actions After LabCorp
David Ross (Partner-Washington, DC) will present the seminar "No Harm, But Still a Foul? Defending No-Injury Class Actions After LabCorp" at the 2026 DRI Business and Intellectual Property Litigation Super Conference, to be held April 15–17, 2026, in Miami, Florida. Defendants increasingly face class actions premised on conduct that caused no actual injury – ranging from alleged product defects that never manifested to data breaches in which implicated information was neither used for identity theft nor fraud, nor exposed on the dark web. After the Supreme Court granted and then dismissed review in Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings v. Davis, uncertainty remains about certifying classes that include members who lack Article III standing. David explores the current legal landscape for no-injury class actions and offers practical defense strategies, including standing challenges and constitutional arguments against awarding damages to unharmed class members.
Read more

Client Wins
Suarez and Restrepo Secure Full Dismissal for Global Resort Group in Third-Party Liability Case
Tanya Suarez (Partner-Miami) and Michael Restrepo (Associate-Miami, FL) secured a complete dismissal of all claims in the Miami-Dade County Circuit Court on behalf of Wilson Elser’s clients, a global resort group and its resort property located in the Bahamas. This complex third-party action arose from an alleged recreational vehicle accident near the resort’s security gate. The third-party plaintiff alleged negligence claims against our clients, alleging that inadequate roadway lighting contributed to the accident.
	
	Tanya and Michael engaged in extensive motion practice, submitting more than 500 pages of briefing. The team moved to dismiss plaintiff’s claims on multiple grounds, including expiration of the statute of limitations, failure to state a cause of action, and forum non conveniens. After nearly two hours of oral argument, the court granted the motion in full. The court agreed with Tanya and Michael’s arguments and found the statute of limitations issue to be dispositive, ruling that the claims were time-barred and untimely under Florida law, while also considering the Bahamian statute of limitations issues raised in the briefing. In light of this ruling, the court did not reach the remaining arguments, including forum non conveniens, which had previously been raised by the third-party plaintiffs (Florida residents), denied by the trial court, and affirmed on appeal in the original action, before our client’s involvement as a third-party defendant.
Read more

Privacy Settings