The Second District Court of Appeal held that, under the pre-reform PAGA statute, an individual employee need not have been employed or experienced a Labor Code violation during the one-year PAGA limitations period to have...more
5/30/2025
/ Appeals ,
Article III ,
California ,
Employee Rights ,
Employees ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Labor Code ,
Labor Law Violations ,
Litigation Strategies ,
Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) ,
Standing ,
State Labor Laws ,
Statute of Limitations ,
Statutory Interpretation
The First District held that a prevailing defendant in a PAGA action may not recover litigation costs from the California Labor Workforce Development Agency when the LWDA did not participate in the litigation....more
5/21/2025
/ Appeals ,
California ,
Employees ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Hobby Lobby ,
Labor & Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) ,
Litigation Fees & Costs ,
Litigation Strategies ,
Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) ,
State Labor Laws ,
Wage and Hour ,
Wage Orders
The Fourth District held that a motion to compel arbitration is not the correct vehicle to challenge a plaintiff’s failure to plead the individual component of a PAGA claim affirming the Superior Court’s denial of a motion to...more
The Second District again held that issue preclusion barred plaintiff’s PAGA claim because he failed to establish any violation of the Labor Code and arbitral findings have a preclusive effect on a plaintiff’s standing in a...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court held that PAGA does not apply to public entity employers....more
8/20/2024
/ Appeals ,
Appellate Courts ,
CA Supreme Court ,
California ,
Civil Monetary Penalty ,
Employees ,
Employment Litigation ,
Labor Code ,
Labor Law Violations ,
Public Entities ,
Statutory Interpretation
The Second District, following Adolph and not Viking River, confirms that a PAGA plaintiff does not lose standing to pursue a PAGA claim if they “did not file an individual cause of action seeking individual relief.”...more
California healthcare employers are facing primetime levels of costly litigation alleging claims based on miscalculation of the regular rate of pay. Healthcare employers are often targets because non-exempt healthcare...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: On January 18, 2024, in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., the California Supreme Court addressed the split in appellate authority as to whether trial courts have inherent authority to strike a PAGA...more