On June 17, 2022, the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Three (Los Angeles), issued an opinion in Meza v. Pacific Bell Telephone Company (B317119, June 17, 2022) __ Cal.App.5th ___. In this...more
On June 15, 2022, the United States Supreme Court rendered an opinion in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana that will have significant consequences for California employers and claims made under the Private Attorneys...more
6/20/2022
/ Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
Class Action ,
Employment Litigation ,
Federal Arbitration Act ,
Labor Law Violations ,
Preemption ,
Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) ,
SCOTUS ,
Viking River Cruises ,
Viking River Cruises Inc v Moriana
In Resh v. China Agritech, No. 15-55432, published May 24, 2017 (Resh), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a would-be class action is not time barred where (1) the plaintiffs were unnamed plaintiffs in two earlier...more
In Mohamed v. Uber Technologies (9th Cir. 15-16178), published September 7, 2016, a three judge panel of the Ninth Circuit upheld Uber’s mandatory arbitration provisions in the contracts signed by its drivers. In its ruling,...more
In O’Connor v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (Filed 09/01/2015, No. C-13-3826 EMC), the United States District Court, Northern District of California, certified a class of approximately 160,000 current and former drivers of Uber in...more
9/3/2015
/ Ascertainable Class ,
Class Action ,
Class Certification ,
Commonality ,
FRCP 23 ,
Independent Contractors ,
Misclassification ,
Numerosity ,
Predominance Requirement ,
Reimbursements ,
Tips ,
Uber
In Reyes v. Dollar Tree Stores, Inc. (Filed April 1, 2015, No. 15-55176) the United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, held the certification of a class triggers a new opportunity for a defendant to remove the matter to...more
In Mies v. Sephora U.S.A., Inc., No. A139410, published February 26, 2015 (Mies), the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District held that a trial court’s broad discretion to rule on class certification encompasses...more
In Augustus v. ABM Security Services, Inc. (Nos. B243788 & B247392, filed 12/31/14), the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District held Labor Code section 226.7 prescribes only that an employee may not be...more
In Audio Visual Services Group, Inc. v. Superior Court (Juan Solares), Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. B256266, Filed January 21, 2015, the Court of Appeal held that the Hotel Service Charge Reform Ordinance ("Ordinance")...more