Dogecoin’s Day in Court
#WorkforceWednesday® - Key SCOTUS Decisions This Term for Employers - Employment Law This Week®
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 14: Resolving Cross-Border Conflicts Through International Arbitration
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: A Discussion of Industry and Consumer Perspectives on Mass Arbitration
Navigating Mass Arbitration: New Rules and Strategies — The Consumer Finance Podcast
#WorkforceWednesday: Avoiding Legal Illusions - Crafting Effective Arbitration Agreements - Employment Law This Week®
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: A Look at a New Approach to Consumer Contracts
Do You Need an Arbitration Clause in Your Energy Contract? Pros and Cons
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Reasons Why the CFPB Should Deny the Petition for Rulemaking on Post-Dispute Consumer Arbitration Agreements
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: A Deep Dive into Mass Arbitration, with Special Guest Andrew Pincus, Partner, Mayer Brown
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Rules on PAGA, Fifth Circuit Rules on COVID-19 Under WARN, Illinois Expands Bereavement Leave - Employment Law This Week®
California Employment News: US Supreme Court “Viking River” Decision Brings PAGA Relief for CA Employers
Employment Law Now VI-116-Top 10 Employment Issues To Consider For The Summer Kick-Off
3 Key Takeaways | Drafting & Navigating Dispute Resolution Clauses
#WorkforceWednesday: EEOC COVID-19 Charges Surge, NYC’s Pay Transparency Law, SCOTUS Considers PAGA - Employment Law This Week®
Law Brief®: Jonathan Temchin and Richard Schoenstein Explore Arbitration
Hot Spots in Employment Law 2022
#WorkforceWednesday: New Law on Arbitration of Sexual Harassment Claims, Cyber War Ramps Up, Salaried Nonexempt Status - Employment Law This Week®
Employment Law Now VI-114-Banning Arbitration of Sexual Harassment/Assault Claims
Update and Discussion on Legal and Practical Issues
Employee Who Wanted To Donate/Freeze Her Eggs Was Not Protected By Pregnancy Statute - Paleny v. Fireplace Products U.S., Inc., 103 Cal. App. 5th 199 (2024) - Erika Paleny alleged harassment, discrimination and...more
A recent unpublished California Court of Appeal decision, Hegemier v. A Better Life Recovery LLC, Cal. Ct. App., 4th Dist., No. G061892, demonstrates the potential consequence of drafting an arbitration agreement without...more
Johnson v. Lowe’s Home Centers, LLC, 93 F.4th 459 (9th Cir. 2024) - The Ninth Circuit vacated a district court’s dismissal of a former employee’s “non-individual” Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims in the wake of...more
In Johnson v. Lowe’s Home Centers, LLC, the Ninth Circuit sided with the California Supreme Court’s ruling in Adolph v. Uber Techs. Inc., 14 Cal. 5th 1104 (2023), and held that the district court was correct to send the...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court delivered its highly anticipated response to the United States Supreme Court decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S. Ct. 1906 (2022), clarifying the effect of...more
The Supreme Court of the United States has been active of late in issuing decisions interpreting the Federal Arbitration Act — the principal federal statute governing judicial enforcement of arbitration agreements. In 2022,...more
On July 17, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (S274671, Cal. Jul. 2023), holding that an employee who has been compelled to arbitrate claims under the Labor Code Private...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court decided an important state law issue raised by the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S. Ct. 1906 (2022). Viking River Cruises...more
In June 2022, the United States Supreme Court held in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana—contrary to California precedent—that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) allows PAGA claims to be split into individual and non-individual...more
In June 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana that (1) the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) requires the enforcement of an arbitration agreement that waives an employee’s...more
The California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited ruling in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. on July 17, 2023, holding that an employee can pursue a non-individual representative action under the Private Attorneys General...more
California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) authorizes current and former employees to bring a representative action for civil penalties on behalf of the state against an employer for Labor Code violations committed...more
Summary - The California Supreme Court held in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. that a plaintiff compelled to arbitrate an individual California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claim still maintains...more
Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an employer-friendly decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana. There, it held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts the California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA)...more
In Adolph v. Uber Technologies Inc., the California Supreme Court held that it is not bound by the US Supreme Court’s interpretation of state law in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana, ruling that an order compelling arbitration...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court ruled that where an employee has brought a California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) action that is comprised of both individual and non-individual claims, a court order...more
The California Supreme Court in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. affirmed the key holding in the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana last year—the FAA requires PAGA plaintiffs to...more
In a long-awaited decision issued on July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court held in Adolph v. Uber Technologies Inc. that a plaintiff who has been compelled to arbitrate his individual claims for civil penalties pursuant...more
As anticipated, earlier this week, the California Supreme Court broke from the U.S. Supreme Court’s Viking River Cruises v. Moriana decision, and further tipped the scales in favor of PAGA plaintiffs in California by holding...more
On July 17, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (Cal. Sup. Ct. Case No. S274671), in which it addressed whether a plaintiff who is compelled to arbitrate their individual...more
Yesterday, the California Supreme Court, in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., addressed the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S.Ct. 1906 (2022). The much-anticipated Adolph...more
In June of last year, the United States Supreme Court held in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana that a plaintiff in an action under the Private Attorney General Act (“PAGA”) loses standing to pursue claims on behalf of...more
What Happens to the “Non-individual” PAGA Claims Now that Viking River Cruises Compels Arbitration of the “Individual” PAGA Claim? The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana was widely seen...more
Navigating the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) landscape can be overwhelming for California employers. To help employers stay updated on the ever-evolving statute, this article highlights key takeaways from our recent...more
This week, California’s Supreme Court heard oral argument in Adolph v. Uber Technologies Inc., No. S274671, a case in which the Court is poised to decide whether it will, in effect, overrule part of a recent U.S. Supreme...more