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
On June 15, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, Case No. 20-1573. At issue was a rule announced by the California Supreme Court in Iskanian v. CLS...more
Since 2004, the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) has been a thorn in the side of employers in the State of California. Indeed, there are approximately 17 PAGA actions filed every day in the state. A PAGA claim allows a...more
California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) is a statute that authorizes employees to bring an action for civil penalties on behalf of the state against an employer for Labor Code violations committed against the...more
On June 15, the U.S. Supreme Court finally brought closure to the long-running, unsettled issue of whether California’s prohibition against arbitration agreement waivers of the right to bring representative actions under the...more
In Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 596 U. S. ____ (2022), the U.S. Supreme Court finally answered a question of far-reaching impact for California employers: Whether the Federal Arbitration Act, (“FAA”) preempts...more
In a decision employers across California have been waiting for since December (see our initial article on this issue), the United States Supreme Court held this morning in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, that the...more
In Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, Case No. 20-1573, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether representative claims under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) may be compelled to individual...more
In Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, Case No. 20-1573, the U.S. Supreme Court is poised to decide later this term whether the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts a California rule, established in Iskanian v. CLS...more
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
Seyfarth Synopsis: Plaintiffs cannot circumvent arbitration agreements by characterizing claims for statutory damages as claims for civil penalties. The purported PAGA exemption from arbitration agreements applies only to...more
A refinery operator (“Wulfe”), sued his former employer alleging several employment related claims, including a claim under the California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA). The court compelled arbitration, and the...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Three decisions issued earlier this month reveal an increasing tension between the Ninth Circuit and California appellate courts on whether representative PAGA actions can be arbitrated. As a result,...more
Defendants appealed an order from a California federal district court that denied their motion to compel individual arbitration of a former employee’s representative claim under California’s Private Attorney General Act...more
Many employers enter into arbitration agreements with their employees to expedite resolution and mitigate the risk of jury trials. For the most part, a proper arbitration agreement would have the effect of requiring both the...more
We previously reported on California courts refusing to enforce waivers contained in arbitration agreements of representative claims under California’s Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”). These cases have...more
The Ninth Circuit Decision - Delivering a perhaps unexpected blow to employers, the Ninth Circuit sided with the California Supreme Court earlier this week in upholding the state-court-fashioned Iskanian rule, which...more
On September 28, 2015, the Ninth Circuit held in Shukri Sakkab v. Luxottica Retail North America, Inc. that the FAA does not preempt the rule that the California Supreme Court enunciated in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation that...more
This week, in Sakkab, et al v. Luxottica Retail North America, Inc., the Ninth Circuit ruled that an employee cannot waive the right to bring a representative action under the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) through an...more
On September 28, 2015, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a 2-1 decision in the long-awaited case of Sakkab v. Luxottica Retail North America, Inc. (No. 13-55184, D.C. No. 3:12-cv-00436-GPC-KSC) (“Sakkab”). The Court...more
Yesterday, by a two-to-one vote, the Ninth Circuit joined the California Supreme Court in holding that Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims are an exception to the Federal Arbitration Act. In Sakkab v. Luxottica Retail...more
On June 24, 2014, the California Supreme Court issued a controversial decision in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC. While the Court in Iskanian confirmed that an express class action waiver in an employment...more
In an October 22, 2014, posting, we addressed the growing divide between California federal district courts and the California Supreme Court over whether an arbitration agreement can waive an employee’s right to pursue a...more
When the California Supreme Court decided Iskanian v. CLS Transp. Los Angeles, LLC, 59 Cal. 4th 348 (2014), this June, some legal commentators assumed that employees could not waive pre-litigation claims under the Private...more