Latest Publications

Share:

How an Insufficient LWDA Notice Led to a Dismissal with Prejudice for One PAGA Plaintiff

On January 14, 2022, in Lehauli v. All Nippon Airways Co., Case No. 21STCV02847, Judge Holly J. Fujie of the Los Angeles Superior Court granted the defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, finding that the plaintiff...more

California Expands Prohibition on Certain Nondisclosure and Non-Disparagement Clauses in Settlement, Separation, and Certain Other...

Key Points - On January 1, 2022, SB 331—also known as the Silenced No More Act—went into effect in California. It prohibits clauses, in settlement agreements for civil or administrative claims, which prevent or restrict the...more

Recent PAGA Settlement Demonstrates Why PAGA Cases Are Typically Worth Far Less Than the Maximum Theoretical Recovery

On January 11, 2022, Judge Cunningham of the Los Angeles Superior Court conditionally approved a $7.5 million agreement to settle three overlapping Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) actions, the lead case titled Reyes v....more

LWDA Weighs In on Split of Authority Regarding Standing to Intervene to Challenge PAGA Settlement

In recent months, a split of authority has emerged in the California Court of Appeal regarding whether a nonparty aggrieved employee has standing to intervene in a Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) action to challenge a...more

A Post-Epic Systems Challenge to Iskanian Has Been Taken Up by the U.S. Supreme Court

In Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC, 59 Cal. 4th 348 (2014), the California Supreme Court held that an arbitration agreement purporting to waive the right to bring a representative action under the Private...more

Court of Appeal Holds That Only Default PAGA Penalties Are Available for Inaccurate Wage Statements

On December 1, 2021, the California Court of Appeal (4th District) issued its decision in Gunther v. Alaska Airlines, Inc., Case No. D076762, holding that heightened penalties for wage statement violations under Labor Code...more

Court of Appeal Defines Standard of Review for PAGA Settlements

On November 30, 2021, the California Court of Appeal (First District) issued its decision in Moniz v. Adecco USA, Inc., Case No. A159410, 2021 WL 5578298, which defines the standard for courts to apply when reviewing...more

Feltzs Offers First Glimpse at How Federal Courts May Apply Wesson

Earlier this year, in Wesson v. Staples the Office Superstore, LLC, 68 Cal. App. 5th 746 (2021), the California Court of Appeals held that courts are empowered to limit or strike representative claims under the Private...more

Post-Epic Systems Challenges to Iskanian Are Going Nowhere

In the landmark case of Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC, 59 Cal. 4th 348 (2014), the California Supreme Court held that an arbitration agreement purporting to waive the right to bring a representative action...more

Court of Appeals Clarifies What Types of Allegations May Be Cured Under Section 2699.3

On October 7, 2021, the California Court of Appeal (4th District) issued its decision in Quinonez v. Payless 4 Plumbing, Inc., Case No. E074467, clarifying what allegations in a notice letter to the Labor and Workforce...more

Court of Appeal Holds That Exhaustion Requires Identification of Each Separate Theory of Liability (Update)

On September 30, 2021, the California Court of Appeal (4th District) decided Uribe v. Crown Building Maintenance Co., Case No. G057836. At issue in Uribe was a Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) settlement that purported to...more

PAGA Repeal May Be On the Ballot in 2022

Earlier this month, a coalition including the California Chamber of Commerce, California New Car Dealers Association and Western Growers filed a proposed initiative measure entitled The Fair Pay and Employer Accountability...more

Nonparties to PAGA Action Have No Grounds to Intervene or Challenge Judgment

On September 30, 2021, the California Court of Appeal (Second District) issued its decision in Turrieta v. Lyft, Inc., Case No. B304701, which limits the ability of nonparty “aggrieved employees” to challenge a Private...more

PAGA Settlement May Release Claims from Outside of the Limitations Period

On September 28, 2021, the California Court of Appeal (4th District) issued a counterintuitive decision in Amaro v. Anaheim Arena Mgmt., LLC, Case No. G058371, holding that a PAGA settlement may release claims from outside of...more

Court of Appeal Holds That Exhaustion Requires Identification of Each Separate Theory of Liability

On September 30, 2021, the California Court of Appeal (4th District) decided Uribe v. Crown Building Maintenance Co., Case No. G057836. At issue in Uribe was a Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) settlement that purported to...more

SB 646 Exempts Some Unionized Janitorial Employees from PAGA

On September 27, 2021, Gov. Newsom signed into law SB 646, which exempts janitorial employees from PAGA if they are covered by a collective bargaining agreement meeting certain minimum criteria. The bill, which codifies a new...more

Not So Fast: Trial Courts Finding PAGA’s Statute of Limitations Is Still Alive and Well After Johnson v. Maxim Healthcare

Earlier this year, the California Court of Appeal ruled that a plaintiff was permitted to pursue a PAGA claim for alleged violations of Labor Code Section 432.5, even though the statute of limitations on her individual claim...more

California Court of Appeal Approves Limiting or Striking Unmanageable PAGA Claims

In Wesson v. Staples The Office Superstore, LLC, the California Court of Appeal held that “courts have inherent authority to ensure that PAGA claims can be fairly and efficiently tried and, if necessary, may strike claims...more

California Supreme Court Holds Break Premiums Must Account For Nondiscretionary Payments In Addition to the Hourly Rate of Pay

Key Points - In Ferra v. Loews Hollywood Hotel, LLC, the California Supreme Court held that premiums paid for missed meal, rest or recovery periods must include nondiscretionary pay, not just hourly wages. The decision...more

California Supreme Court Lowers the Bar for Employees Seeking to Prove Meal Break Claims

In Donohue v. AMN Services, LLC, the California Supreme Court held that where employees’ time records reflect a missed, late or short meal break, a “rebuttable presumption” arises that a proper meal break was not provided....more

Reminder: New California Employment Laws for 2021

Key Points: - Numerous new California laws going into effect on January 1, 2021 (or earlier), will impact employers and employees. - The most significant laws include new obligations to report employee pay data, an...more

Cal/OSHA Issues Emergency COVID-19 Regulations

Key Points - Cal/OSHA issued new emergency regulations regarding COVID-19 prevention and outbreaks in the workplace that are applicable to nearly all California employers, which were approved and became effective November...more

New California COVID-19 Employment Laws Require Attention

- California has implemented a broad supplemental sick leave law requiring employers with 500 or more employees (and health care employers with fewer than 500 employees) to provide their California workers with up to 80 hours...more

Effectively Managing Workforce Contraction in Turbulent Times

The grinding halt of the U.S. economy due to the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the Russia-Saudi Arabia oil price war, have forced companies in every industry to evaluate workforce reorganizations and reductions....more

California Supreme Court Holds That Time Employees Spent On Mandatory Exit Inspections Is Compensable

- The California Supreme Court held that time Apple employees spent waiting for and undergoing mandatory security inspections is compensable. - The decision rejects the holding by some lower courts that if employees could...more

78 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 4

"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