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
As reported in Public Citizen’s Consumer Law & Policy Blog, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently agreed to review Chilutti v. Uber Technologies, Inc., in which a divided panel of the Pennsylvania Superior Court (and later...more
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois has rejected an argument that opting out of arbitration clauses precluded arbitration under prior arbitration agreements in a dispute between Uber drivers and...more
Johnson v. Lowe’s Home Centers, LLC, 93 F.4th 459 (9th Cir. 2024) - The Ninth Circuit vacated a district court’s dismissal of a former employee’s “non-individual” Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims in the wake of...more
The Nevada Supreme Court recently reversed the denial of a motion to compel arbitration, explaining that the plaintiff’s arguments that the contract at issue was illegal were not a valid basis to deny arbitration because...more
Join us on September 26 for a comprehensive webinar hosted by CDF as we delve into the crucial subject of arbitrating PAGA claims, exploring its implications following the California Supreme Court's landmark decision in...more
The California Supreme Court recently rejected the U.S. Supreme Court’s interpretation of standing under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA). In Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., 532 P.3d 682 (Cal. 2023), the Court...more
On July 17, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., finally clarifying the question of what constitutes standing under California's Private Attorneys General Act...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court delivered its highly anticipated response to the United States Supreme Court decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S. Ct. 1906 (2022), clarifying the effect of...more
Following the United States Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Moriana v. Viking River Cruises, California courts were tasked with the open question of whether an “aggrieved” employee whose individual Private Attorneys...more
Last year, we discussed the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (“Viking River”), 596 U.S. [142 S.Ct. 1906] (2022), holding that an arbitration agreement between a...more
On July 17, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (S274671, Cal. Jul. 2023), holding that an employee who has been compelled to arbitrate claims under the Labor Code Private...more
Recently, in Adolph v. Uber Tech., Inc., the California Supreme Court held that plaintiffs who proceed to arbitration on individual labor code claims do not lose standing to bring representative claims in court under the...more
In June 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana that (1) the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) requires the enforcement of an arbitration agreement that waives an employee’s...more
The California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited ruling in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. on July 17, 2023, holding that an employee can pursue a non-individual representative action under the Private Attorneys General...more
Highlights of Adolph v. Uber Tech., Inc. PAGA representatives retain standing to prosecute non-individual PAGA claims in court, even when their individual PAGA claims are compelled into arbitration....more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. With this decision California employers need to understand that plaintiffs do not lose standing when individual...more
Summary - The California Supreme Court held in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. that a plaintiff compelled to arbitrate an individual California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claim still maintains...more
Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an employer-friendly decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana. There, it held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts the California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA)...more
In Adolph v. Uber Technologies Inc., the California Supreme Court held that it is not bound by the US Supreme Court’s interpretation of state law in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana, ruling that an order compelling arbitration...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court issued its long-anticipated decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. and held that an employee who has been compelled to arbitrate “individual” claims under the California...more
The California Supreme Court in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. affirmed the key holding in the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana last year—the FAA requires PAGA plaintiffs to...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court unanimously held in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. that even if a plaintiff who brings a claim under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) has their individual...more
On July 17, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (Cal. Sup. Ct. Case No. S274671), in which it addressed whether a plaintiff who is compelled to arbitrate their individual...more
The California Supreme Court held that when a court compels an employee to arbitrate their “individual” Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims, the employee retains statutory standing to pursue...more