News & Analysis as of

CA Supreme Court Appeals Employment Litigation

BakerHostetler

It’s Settled: A PAGA Plaintiff Has No Right to Intervene, Vacate or Object to Another PAGA Plaintiff’s Settlement, Affirms the...

BakerHostetler on

In a welcome win for employers, the California Supreme Court recently blocked a PAGA plaintiff’s attempt to intervene and object to another PAGA plaintiff’s proposed settlement as a matter of right, in Turrieta v. Lyft, Inc.,...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

PAGA Paraphrased – Stone v. Alameda Health System

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court held that PAGA does not apply to public entity employers....more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Supreme Court Confirms the “Knowing and Intentional” Standard of California’s Wage Statement Law Requires a “Knowing...

In Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, the case’s second appearance before the California Supreme Court in two years, the Supreme Court confirmed that an employer does not incur civil penalties for failing to report unpaid...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Supreme Court Decision Limits Manageability Dismissals for PAGA Claims

For companies doing business in California, it’s important to be aware of the January 18, 2024 California Supreme Court decision in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc.*, which examined whether trial courts can strike PAGA...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Estrada Is Not a Death Knell to PAGA Defenses

McDermott Will & Emery on

On January 18, 2024, in a highly anticipated and unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of California barred striking a claim under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) on trial manageability grounds alone, instead...more

ArentFox Schiff

California Employers Face Feb. 14 Deadline and Tighter Non-Compete Prohibitions

ArentFox Schiff on

California has long had the most restrictive laws against employee non-compete agreements. Effective January 1, two new legislative bills, Senate Bill 699 and Assembly Bill 1076, tightened California’s restrictions even...more

Jenner & Block

California Supreme Court Breaks from Federal Precedent on PAGA

Jenner & Block on

The California Supreme Court issued a much-anticipated Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. in July, departing from the United States Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in Viking River...more

Harris Beach PLLC

California Holds Employers Have No Duty to Protect Employees’ Households from COVID-19

Harris Beach PLLC on

The California Supreme Court has answered in the negative the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ certified question regarding “take-home” COVID-19 exposure (see Federal Appeals Court Asks California If Covid-19 “Take Home” Suits...more

Stokes Wagner

Rounding Time Entries - Just Don’t Do It

Stokes Wagner on

On October 24, 2022, the Sixth District issued a decision in in Camp v. Home Depot, handing employees a major win in the wage and hour arena by holding that Home Depot’s practice of rounding hourly employees’ total daily...more

Jones Day

California Supreme Court Authorizes Additional Remedies for Meal Break Violations: Waiting Time and Wage Statement Penalties Now...

Jones Day on

The California Supreme Court sides with employees in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, finding derivative claims available for waiting time and pay stub penalties available for meal and rest break violations. This...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

California Supreme Court Rules Meal and Rest Break Premiums Constitute “Wages” Potentially Triggering Penalties for Violations

In a much anticipated ruling, on May 23, 2022, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Naranjo et al. v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc. Previously, the Court of Appeal held that unpaid premium payments for meal...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

California Supreme Court to Consider Employer Liability for Worker’s Wife’s COVID-19

The U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, has certified two questions to the California Supreme Court about the liability of employers when an employee contracts COVID-19 at work and brings the virus home to a spouse. ...more

Perkins Coie

Ninth Circuit Affirms District Court’s Dismissal of Claims as Preempted by NLRA and Class Action Settlement

Perkins Coie on

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, on March 18, 2022, applying de novo review, affirmed the district court’s dismissal of plaintiff Cesar Moreno’s wrongful termination claims against his former employer,...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Split of Authority Emerges Regarding Whether Employers Can Dismiss PAGA Lawsuits on Manageability Grounds

On March 23, 2022, the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth District in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., ruled that courts do not have authority to strike a claim under the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”)...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Employers May Face an Expanded Liability Period in PAGA Suits Under the Relation Back Doctrine

On February 7, 2022 a California Court of Appeal issued its decision in Hutcheson v. The Superior Court of Alameda County (UBS Financial Services, Inc.). The case addresses the relation back doctrine in the context of a...more

ArentFox Schiff

California Supreme Court Adopts Employee-Friendly Test for Whistleblower Retaliation Claims

ArentFox Schiff on

The California Supreme Court has held that the standard for assessing whistleblower retaliation claims under California Labor Code section 1102.5 is not the McDonnell Douglas test, but the more plaintiff-friendly standard...more

Perkins Coie

CA Supreme Court Clarifies Standard for Whistleblower Retaliation Claims Under Labor Code Section 1102.5

Perkins Coie on

The Supreme Court of California provided California employers with important clarification on the standard courts will apply when analyzing an employee’s whistleblower retaliation claim arising under Labor Code Section...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

California Supreme Court Holds Failure to Promote Claims Accrue With Employee’s ‘Knowledge’ of Denied Promotion

If an employee is passed over for a promotion due to alleged harassment, does the failure to promote happen when the employer decides to promote someone else or when the successful candidate actually takes on the role? ...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

California Supreme Court’s Decision on Premium Payments for Meal, Rest, and Recovery Break Violations

On July 15, 2021, the California Supreme Court issued a decision that will increase dramatically California employers’ potential liability for missed meal, rest, and recovery breaks. In Ferra v. Loews Hollywood Hotel, LLC,...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Has Rounding Overstayed its Welcome in California?

For the past decade, many California employers have lawfully used neutral rounding systems to compensate employees. Rounding is the practice of adjusting an employees’ recorded time worked to the nearest preset increment for...more

Fisher Phillips

Employees Win Latest California Bag Check Case – But Court Leaves One Final Cliffhanger On The Compensability Of Closing Tasks

Fisher Phillips on

The long-fought bag-check battle against Apple is coming to an end, and the employee class just won a major victory in California when a federal court of appeals ruled that the company must pay its workers for the time spent...more

Payne & Fears

Key California Employment Law Cases: June 2020

Payne & Fears on

Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, 140 S. Ct. 1731 (2020) - Summary:  Title VII prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity....more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

PAGA Claims Limited to Recovery of Civil Penalties

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court has held that an individual may not seek unpaid wages under Labor Code section 558. Section 558 can be invoked only by the Labor Commissioner or by an individual suing under...more

Payne & Fears

Ninth Circuit Backtracks On Dynamex Retroactivity

Payne & Fears on

As we previously reported, on May 2, 2019, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Vazquez v. Jan-Pro Franchising Int'l, No. 17-16096, held that the California Supreme Court's landmark decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc....more

Fisher Phillips

9th Circuit Kicks Dynamex Retroactivity Question To State High Court

Fisher Phillips on

With just a one-page, single-paragraph Order, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday provided the faintest glimmer of hope for gig economy businesses everywhere – but especially for those in California. The federal...more

38 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"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