News & Analysis as of

Summary Judgment Wage Orders

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Good Faith Dispute Over Employment Relationship Allows Walmart to Escape Waiting Time Penalties

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

Payne & Fears

Key California Employment Law Cases: June 2020

Payne & Fears on

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

Holland & Knight LLP

Ninth Circuit: Dynamex "ABC" Test Unquestionably Applies Retroactively

Holland & Knight LLP on

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

Payne & Fears

Key California Employment Law Cases: October 2018

Payne & Fears on

This month’s key employment law cases address the test for independent contractor status, the legality of an incentive compensation system, and personal liability for wage and hour violations....more

Fisher Phillips

The Ghost of Borello Returns This Halloween! Court Holds Dynamex ABC Test Applies Only to Wage Order Claims

Fisher Phillips on

As we have covered extensively, the California Supreme Court dropped a proverbial bomb earlier this year in the Dynamex case when it adopted a new legal standard known as the “ABC Test,” making it much more difficult for...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Court of Appeal Affirms That Dynamex’s ABC Independent Contract Test Is Limited To Claims Arising Under Wage Orders

In Jesus Cuitlahuac Garcia v. Border Transportation Group, LLC, et al, the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District has held that the ABC test set forth in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, 4...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Federal Court Serves Up Satisfying Seconds For California Franchisors: No Ostensible Agency Liability For Franchisees’ Alleged...

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: A federal court in California recently held that a franchisor cannot be held liable for labor code claims where it did not exercise control directly, or through an actual agency relationship with the...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Court of Appeal Affirms Validity of Hospital Meal Period Waivers

The ability of hospitals to use meal period waivers was called into question by a 2015 Court of Appeal decision in Gerard v. Orange Coast Memorial Medical Center (Gerard I), which held that the provision in Wage Order 5...more

McGuireWoods LLP

California Supreme Court Clarifies When Employers Must Provide Employees With Seats

McGuireWoods LLP on

On April 4, 2016, the California Supreme Court issued an opinion with important implications for all California employers. For the first time, the court interpreted the meaning of wage orders promulgated by California’s...more

9 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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