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
A commercial general liability (CGL) insurance policy may provide coverage for Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) class actions, the California Supreme Court has ruled, answering a certified question from the Ninth U.S....more
The California Supreme Court issued the following decision last week: Yahoo, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA, No. S253593. Yahoo!’s insurer, National Union, refused to indemnify Yahoo! in...more
On January 15, 2019, the Ninth Circuit certified the following question to the California Supreme Court: Does a commercial liability policy that covers “personal injury,” defined as “injury… arising out of… [o]ral or...more
Does the coverage in commercial general liability (CGL) policies for violations of the right to privacy extend to unwanted intrusions, or is it limited to the disclosure of personal information to a third party? On a recent...more
Welcome to CICR’s annual review of insurance cases. Here, we spotlight five (actually, seven) decisions from the last year that you should know about, and five pending cases—all before state high courts—to keep an eye on. The...more
The California Supreme Court answered the Ninth Circuit’s certified question in Liberty Surplus Insurance v. Ledesma & Meyer Construction. The court rephrased the question presented to it as: “When a third party sues an...more
The California Supreme Court recently granted review in Travelers Property & Casualty Co. v. Actavis, Inc., a very unusual case where two counties sued the manufacturers of opiate medicines for allegedly engaging in a...more
On October 6, the California Supreme Court heard oral argument in Los Angeles Board of Supervisors v. Superior Court, a case that we have blogged about twice in the past because of its possible impact on policyholders...more
In this month's highlights, a federal court rules that insurance coverage was triggered for the defense of garment hang tag "advertisements" in a trademark/copyright and unfair competition lawsuit…the California Supreme Court...more
Good News for Corporate Policyholders: Insurer Cannot Refuse Coverage Based on Insured's Assignment of Rights Under Policies After Loss Has Occurred - Why it matters: Reversing its holding in a 2003 case, the Supreme...more
In Fluor Corporation v. Superior Court (No. S205889; filed 8/20/15), the California Supreme Court overruled its earlier decision in Henkel Corp. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. (2003) 29 Cal.4th 934, holding that...more
In a unanimous decision handed down by the California Supreme Court on August 20, 2015 in Fluor Corporation v. Superior Court, the court removed a significant obstacle facing companies that want to assign their interests in a...more
On August 10, 2015, the California Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision that could have broad implications regarding an insurer’s right to seek reimbursement of unreasonable fees and costs directly from so-called Cumis...more
The California Supreme Court held in Hartford Casualty Insurance Company v. J.R. Marketing, L.L.C. (Squire Sanders) (8/10/2015 - #S211645) that if Cumis counsel, operating under a court order which such counsel drafted and...more