News & Analysis as of

Appeals CA Supreme Court

Downey Brand LLP

California Supreme Court Clarifies Time to Appeal Writ Decisions

Downey Brand LLP on

In Meinhardt v. City of Sunnyvale (2024) 16 Cal.5th 643 (“Meinhardt”), the California Supreme Court resolved a split in authorities over a procedural matter that will give CEQA litigants some certainty about when an appeal...more

BakerHostetler

It’s Settled: A PAGA Plaintiff Has No Right to Intervene, Vacate or Object to Another PAGA Plaintiff’s Settlement, Affirms the...

BakerHostetler on

In a welcome win for employers, the California Supreme Court recently blocked a PAGA plaintiff’s attempt to intervene and object to another PAGA plaintiff’s proposed settlement as a matter of right, in Turrieta v. Lyft, Inc.,...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

John’s Grill, Inc. v. Hartford Financial Services, Group, Inc.: Illusory Coverage, Unambiguous Policy Language, and the...

In its latest Covid-era coverage case, John’s Grill, Inc. v. Hartford Financial Services, Group, Inc., the California Supreme Court held that an insured cannot use the “illusory coverage doctrine to transform the policy’s...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

PAGA Paraphrased – Stone v. Alameda Health System

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court held that PAGA does not apply to public entity employers....more

Payne & Fears

July 2024 Case Summaries

Payne & Fears on

Summary: Courts must consider allegations of a racially hostile workplace “from the perspective of a reasonable person belonging to the racial or ethnic group of the plaintiff.” Under this framework, “a single racial epithet...more

Proskauer - Minding Your Business

For All Intents and Purposes the Ninth Circuit Shakes Up Antitrust Law With Sidibe v. Sutter Decision

The June 4, 2024 Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Sidibe v. Sutter Health marks a potential shift in how rule of reason antitrust cases are approached and adjudicated. The opinion underscores the significance of...more

Payne & Fears

COVID-19 Does Not Constitute Direct Physical Loss or Damage to Property

Payne & Fears on

The Supreme Court of California recently weighed in on conflicting conclusions reached by California Courts of Appeal regarding insurance coverage for COVID-19 related losses, in its May 23, 2024 decision in Another Planet...more

Patton Sullivan Brodehl LLP

Eviction After Foreclosure: Further Developments from the Courts

A foreclosure sale purchaser attempting to evict a tenant on the property can encounter pitfalls, as made clear in a series of court cases in recent years.  Here is a summary, capped by an update on a recently filed opinion: ...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Supreme Court Confirms the “Knowing and Intentional” Standard of California’s Wage Statement Law Requires a “Knowing...

In Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, the case’s second appearance before the California Supreme Court in two years, the Supreme Court confirmed that an employer does not incur civil penalties for failing to report unpaid...more

Proskauer - Minding Your Business

California Lemon Law Just Got a Little Sweeter for Consumers

On March 4, 2024, the California Supreme Court ruled in Niedermeier v. FCA that consumers forced to trade in or sell their defective vehicles due to a manufacturer’s failure to comply with the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty...more

Jenner & Block

Client Alert: California Consumer Privacy Act Rules: Twists and Turns on the Road to Enforcement

Jenner & Block on

Businesses subject to the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) could be forgiven for feeling like they have whiplash from the twists and turns in the California privacy rulemaking process. To recap: In June 2023, the...more

Patton Sullivan Brodehl LLP

California Supreme Court: Parties to a Real Estate Transaction Can Create Implied Exclusive Easements

In the recent case Romero v. Shih, the California Supreme Court clarified that under California law, parties to a real estate transaction may create an implied easement that effectively grants the dominant tenement exclusive...more

Proskauer Rose LLP

Future Not Looking Bright For California Employee Nonsolicits

Proskauer Rose LLP on

On Jan. 1, new legislation aimed at curbing the use of unenforceable noncompete agreements took effect in California. The new laws, which impose potentially harsh consequences on employers for requiring employees to sign...more

Moore & Van Allen PLLC

The Saga of CPRA Enforcement Continues: California Chamber of Commerce Appeals Recent Decision Vacating Stay

Moore & Van Allen PLLC on

Last week we wrote about the California Court of Appeals’ February 9th decision vacating the trial court’s June 2023 order delaying enforcement of the California Privacy Rights Act (“CPRA”). After that decision, we were left...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

California Supreme Court Limits Manageability Defense to PAGA Claims

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On January 18, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued a highly anticipated decision in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., determining whether trial courts can dismiss Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims as...more

Meyers Nave

Court of Appeal Confirms (Again) that CEQA Statute of Limitations Runs from the First Project Approval

Meyers Nave on

The Second District Court of Appeal confirmed again that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) favors finality in rejecting a challenge to a subsequent project approval for a 42-single family home project in Los...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Supreme Court Decision Limits Manageability Dismissals for PAGA Claims

For companies doing business in California, it’s important to be aware of the January 18, 2024 California Supreme Court decision in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc.*, which examined whether trial courts can strike PAGA...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Estrada Is Not a Death Knell to PAGA Defenses

McDermott Will & Emery on

On January 18, 2024, in a highly anticipated and unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of California barred striking a claim under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) on trial manageability grounds alone, instead...more

ArentFox Schiff

California Employers Face Feb. 14 Deadline and Tighter Non-Compete Prohibitions

ArentFox Schiff on

California has long had the most restrictive laws against employee non-compete agreements. Effective January 1, two new legislative bills, Senate Bill 699 and Assembly Bill 1076, tightened California’s restrictions even...more

Sullivan & Worcester

Thyssen-Bornemisza wins Pissarro painting sold under Nazi duress by Lilly Cassirer

Sullivan & Worcester on

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled on January 9, 2024 that the Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection Foundation in Madrid is the owner of Rue Saint–Honoré, après-midi, effect de pluie (1892) by Camille Pissarro, a...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

Courts Are Overwhelmingly Staying Non-Individual Claims When Compelling Individual PAGA Claims to Arbitration

As we wrote previously, last summer’s blockbuster decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., 14 Cal. 5th 1104 (2023) contained a notable silver lining. In ruling that a Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) plaintiff’s...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

The Case for a PAGA Adequacy Requirement

In Arias v. Superior Court, 46 Cal. 4th 969 (2009), the California Supreme Court ruled that Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) actions need not satisfy class action requirements, and in the fourteen years since, PAGA...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Supreme Court Weighs Whether to Clarify Camping Bans and Homelessness Policies

Local ordinances prohibiting camping or sleeping outdoors have created widespread controversy. Affected cities and states contend that the two Ninth Circuit rulings on the issue are confusing and preclude them from...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

Is the California Supreme Court About to Throw Employers a Bone on PAGA Manageability?

On November 8, 2023, the California Supreme Court heard oral argument in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., a case that could have profound implications for the future of Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) litigation. ...more

Payne & Fears

Key California Employment Law Case Summaries: August 2023

Payne & Fears on

Summary -   Emergency Rule 9, which tolled statutes of limitations for six months due to the COVID-19 pandemic, is valid and operates to extend the time to file a civil suit for a PAGA claim as well as the time period to...more

260 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 11

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide