California Employment News: Can Pre- and Post-Shift Activities Be Compensated (Podcast)
California Employment News: Can Pre- and Post-Shift Activities Be Compensated
This Am Law 50 senior counsel cements his authority through two appellate analytics blogs - Legally Contented Podcast
California Employment News: Premium Pay Constitutes Wages
#WorkforceWednesday: CA Whistleblower Retaliation Cases, NYC Pay Transparency Law, Biden’s Labor Agenda - Employment Law This Week®
AGG Talks: Background Screening - Redaction of Identifiers by the Courts Update, Breaking News from California
AGG Talks: Background Screening - Redaction of Identifiers by the Courts in Michigan and California Pose Challenges for Background Checks
The Situation: The California Supreme Court recently granted review of a California Court of Appeal decision, Gilead Life Sciences, Inc. v. The Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco, that made waves in the...more
On May 1, the California Supreme Court granted Gilead Science Inc.’s request to review a California appellate court’s holding that the pharmaceutical manufacturer must defend against negligence claims stemming from its...more
The California Supreme Court held this month that employers do not owe a duty of care under California law to prevent the spread of COVID-19 to employees’ household members. Kuciemba v. Victory Woodworks, Inc., S274191 (July...more
The state's Supreme Court has unanimously held that employers do not owe a duty of care under tort law to prevent the spread of COVID-19 to employees' household members. Although the Court, in Kuciemba v. Victory Woodworks,...more
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
The Supreme Court of California recently held that the California Workers’ Compensation Act (WCA) does not bar an employee’s spouse from bringing a negligence claim against the employer where the employee contracts COVID-19...more
Welcome to “PEO Pointers,” a regular series of quick-read alerts to keep PEOs and their client companies up to speed on the latest issues affecting the industry and what they can do to ensure compliance....more
The California Supreme Court held last week that a California employer does not owe a duty of care to prevent the spread of COVID-19 to members of an employee’s household. In a unanimous decision, Kuciemba v. Victory...more
The California Supreme Court in Kuciemba v. Victory Woodworks, Inc was asked to rule on two questions by the 9th Circuit: 1. If an employee contracts COVID-19 at the workplace and brings the virus home to a spouse, causing...more
Repeatedly, people would make these and other more colorful comments whenever I would describe my case pending before the California Supreme Court: Because a construction worker swore the only place he could have contracted...more
Last week, the California Supreme Court responded to a request from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to clarify whether an employer can be sued for negligence based on an employee who contracts COVID-19 at work and later...more
The California Supreme Court handed employers a win last week by making it clear that they do not have a duty to prevent the spread of COVID-19 to employees' household members. The court didn’t go so far as to say such claims...more
In a unanimous opinion, the California Supreme Court answered two questions posed to it by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal, finding that an employer is not liable for a COVID-19 injury sustained by an employee’s household...more
The California Supreme Court issued the following decisions last week: Hoffmann v. Young, et al., Case No. S266003: Under Civil Code section 846, landowners generally owe no duty of care to keep their property safe for...more
Last week, the California Supreme Court agreed to decide two unique questions with far-reaching implications for employer liability: (1) may an employer be held liable to an employee’s spouse when an employee contracts...more
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
On March 7, the California Supreme Court settled the issue of whether a mortgage servicer owes a duty of care to a borrower in the context of loan modification review, holding that negligence claims related to loan...more
Last week, a California federal judge dismissed with leave to amend a claim made against a Nevada company by the spouse of an employee who contracted COVID-19, allegedly at his workplace, and later transmitted the disease to...more
ZB, N.A. v. Super Ct. of San Diego Cty., 8 Cal. 5th 175, 252 Cal. Rptr. 3d 228 (2019) - Summary: Employee may not recover unpaid wages under Labor Code section 558 through PAGA. Facts: Plaintiff Lawson worked for...more
This month’s key California employment law cases involve reporting time pay and potential liability of payroll companies for wage and hour violations. ...more
On February 7, 2019, the California Supreme Court determined that an employee cannot sue a payroll company for breach of contract under the third party beneficiary doctrine, and that it is inappropriate to impose a tort duty...more
In Goonewardene v. ADP, LLC (S238941), the California Supreme Court has created new protections for payroll companies in lawsuits involving claims of labor violations. Although previous case law has held that employees with...more
Last week, the California State Supreme Court struck a decisive victory in favor of payroll companies, issuing a unanimous opinion that an employee is not a third-party beneficiary of the contract between her employer and its...more
• The California Supreme Court recently held that an employee could not pursue contract and tort claims against a payroll service provider for unpaid wages. • The Court found that (1) an employee was not a “third-party...more
On February 7, 2019, the California Supreme Court unanimously held in Goonewardene v. ADP, Inc., S238941 that a payroll service provider cannot be held liable for errors it makes in issuing paychecks to workers of companies...more