Exploring Procedural Justice | Judge Steve Leben | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Handling Post-Conviction Death Penalty Cases Pro Bono | McKenzie Edwards | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Inside the Fourth Court of Appeals’ Clerk’s Office | Michael Cruz | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Supersedeas and Other Recent Rule Changes | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Supreme Court Miniseries: Tribal Rights in the 21st Century
SDNY Chooses “Time Approach” to Calculating Lease Termination Damages Collectible Against a Bankrupt Estate
AGG Talks: Home Health & Hospice - Reimbursement Audits and Appeals
After ALJ: Options and Opportunities in the Face of an Unfavorable ALJ Decision
Understanding the SCOTUS Shadow Docket | Steve Vladeck | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Podcast: The Legal Battle Over Mifepristone - Diagnosing Health Care
Checking in On the 88th Texas Legislature | Jerry Bullard | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Law Brief®: Rich Schoenstein and New York State Senator Luis Sepúlveda Discuss The Chief Judge Controversy
Appellate Justice for Domestic Violence Survivors
Jury Charges and Oral Argument | David Keltner | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
The Evolution of Texas Appellate Practice| David Keltner | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Podcast: California Employment News - Time to Do Away With Rounding Policies
Two Federal Courts Deal Blow to Biden Administration’s Federal Student Loan Forgiveness Program: A Close Look at the Decisions
This Am Law 50 senior counsel cements his authority through two appellate analytics blogs - Legally Contented Podcast
An Inside Look as a Juror - FCRA Focus Podcast
Reflections on 100 Episodes | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
In a recent opinion in Hill v. Walmart Inc., the Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of Walmart on Hill’s claim for waiting time penalties under Labor Code section 203, finding there was a good-faith dispute...more
On February 18, 2022, the California Court of Appeal issued its decision in Jill LaFace v. Ralphs Grocery Company, __ Cal. App. 5th __ (2022), that provides important guidance in two areas. First, the Court made clear that...more
On July 15, 2021, the California Supreme Court issued a decision that will increase dramatically California employers’ potential liability for missed meal, rest, and recovery breaks. In Ferra v. Loews Hollywood Hotel, LLC,...more
The standards for “suitable seating” cases in California were set by the California Supreme Court’s landmark 2016 decision of Kilby v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc. Ever since this decision was handed down, employers and employee...more
Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, 140 S. Ct. 1731 (2020) - Summary: Title VII prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity....more
Frlekin v. Apple, Inc., -- Cal. -- (2020) - Summary: The time employees spent on Apple’s premises waiting for and undergoing a mandatory exit search of personal belongings was compensable as “hours worked” under Wage...more
The year 2019 brought a number of adjustments in the legal landscape for California employers – and meal periods were no exception. California appellate courts buckled down on the interpretation of statutory language in two...more
Ferra v. Loews Hollywood Hotel, LLC, 40 Cal. App. 5th 1239, 253 Cal. Rptr. 3d 798 (2019) - Summary: Term “regular rate of compensation” for calculating meal or rest break premium payments is not synonymous with term...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that McDonald’s is not a joint employer with a franchisee under the definitions found in California Wage Order 5-2001, as it did not have direct control over the store...more
Ever since the California Supreme Court issued its groundbreaking decision in Dynamex Operations W., Inc. v. Superior Ct., 4 Cal. 5th 903 (2018), we have been monitoring its application by the lower courts. On October 8,...more
On April 30, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued its landmark Dynamex decision, applying a new “ABC” test to determine whether workers are classified improperly as independent contractors for claims brought under the...more
A recent California Court of Appeal ruling significantly expands the conditions under which the reporting time pay rule in California will apply. Skylar Ward v. Tilly’s, Inc. involved retail clothing store workers who were...more
A panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued its decision in Vazquez et al. v. Jan-Pro Franchising Int'l., Inc., No. 17-16096 (Jan-Pro) on May 2, 2019, holding that the recently adopted, three-pronged...more
This month’s key California employment law cases involve reporting time pay and potential liability of payroll companies for wage and hour violations. ...more
On February 7, 2019, the Supreme Court of California issued its decision in Goonewardene v. ADP, LLC, holding that employees may not sue their employers’ payroll companies for wage claims in connection with their employment....more
A California court has held that employees required to call their employers before a shift to determine whether they are assigned to work may be entitled to reporting time pay on days when they are not actually put to work....more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Traditionally, “report for work” has meant physically showing up at the jobsite, ready to work. ...more
Last week a California Court of Appeal’s decision concerning the “reporting time pay” wage order rule joined a growing line of other wage order litigation – such as those complaints regarding suitable seating, or rest...more
On February 4, 2019, a divided panel of the California Court of Appeal held in Ward v. Tilly’s, Inc., No. B280151, that employees scheduled for “on-call” or “call-in” shifts may be entitled to reporting time pay, even when...more
• The California Court of Appeal recently expanded the application of reporting time pay to certain types of “on-call” shifts. • If an employer requires an employee to call in or otherwise contact the employer to find out...more
A California Court of Appeal just announced a sweeping change in California’s reporting time pay rules which now prohibits a common scheduling practice used by employers throughout the state (Ward v. Tilly’s, Inc.). Tuesday’s...more
This month’s key employment law cases address meal periods and payment of wages....more
Following a line of recent federal and state court cases, California employers are required to compensate employees receiving commissions and piece rates separately for non-productive time and rest periods. In a recent...more
On December 10, 2018, the California Supreme Court handed down its unanimous decision in Gerard, et al. v. Orange Coast Memorial Medical Center, affirming the Court of Appeal ruling that voluntary meal period waivers are...more
In an important decision for employers in the healthcare industry, the California Supreme Court just approved the Industrial Welfare Commission’s long-standing exemption for health care workers in relation to second meal...more