The Current State of the Holder Rule: Friend or Foe? — Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast
Recent Developments in California's Arbitration Landscape — FCRA Focus Podcast
Lemon Law Shakeup: Rodriguez vs. FCA US Has Unexpected Result – Moving The Metal Podcast
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
Several employment-related cases are currently pending before the California Supreme Court, and their outcomes could have a significant impact on workplace policies and risk management for employers and HR professionals....more
Even with the statutory clarifications that came along with last year’s PAGA reforms, California courts continue to wrestle with one of the thorniest aspects of the law: whether plaintiffs can maintain particularly troubling...more
The Fifth District Court of Appeal reaffirmed its earlier holding in CRST Expedited, Inc. v. Superior Court that plaintiffs can bring “headless” PAGA actions—claims seeking civil penalties solely for Labor Code violations...more
As defense attorneys, we often encounter matters where an employer’s good-faith mistake gives rise to wage and hour litigation. While ignorance of the law generally provides no defense, a good-faith mistake, historically...more
In Leeper v. Shipt, the California Supreme Court will revisit the ongoing question of whether, and to what extent, employees can pursue litigation in court for violation of the California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA),...more
In a unanimous decision that strengthened California’s already robust worker protections laws, the state’s Supreme Court has made it harder for employers to avoid increased damages for minimum wage violations. The ruling in...more
On August 21, 2025, the Supreme Court of California ruled that employers must demonstrate that they took reasonable steps to comply with minimum wage laws to mount a good-faith defense against liquidated damages. The decision...more
The California Supreme Court held that an employer must prove that it made a reasonable attempt to decipher the requirements of the law governing minimum wages in order to avail itself of the good faith defense against...more
We have seen a rise in employees going on the offensive and suing their former employers for damages for not informing them that their noncompete is invalid under the applicable state law or for exaggerating the scope of a...more
The California Supreme Court has clarified how the cost-shifting provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 998 (“Section 998”) may apply when a case settles before trial. In a recent decision, Madrigal v....more
The California Supreme Court issued several important decisions in 2024 about issues such as the application of PAGA to public employees and the definition of “hours worked.” Several cases are pending before the state’s high...more
California law has long held that an employer’s good faith dispute over wages owed, if any, to its employees will preclude the imposition of “waiting time” penalties otherwise due following the termination of their...more
Ten is the presumptive upper limit on the number of depositions that each party may take in civil litigation in the federal courts. This number, provided by Rule 30(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, can be...more
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
The California Supreme Court just ruled that public employers are not subject to civil penalties under the state’s Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA). In a pivotal decision, the court held that public entities,...more
The California Supreme Court just held that a plaintiff in one PAGA action does not have the right to intervene or object to a judgment in a similar action even if a settlement or other resolution in that similar case results...more
On August 1, 2024, in Turrieta v. Lyft et al., the California Supreme Court held that a plaintiff in a Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) action does not have a right to intervene -- or to object to or vacate a judgment...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court ruled that an isolated, one-time, use of a racial slur may be so severe—when viewed in relation to the totality of the circumstances—as to alter the conditions of employment,...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court reaffirmed that arbitration agreements are on equal footing with other types of contracts. Therefore, a court should apply the same principles that apply to other contracts...more
Aggrieved employee is any person who was employed by the alleged violator and against whom one or more of the alleged violations was committed. An “aggrieved employee” is any person who was employed by the alleged violator...more
Meagan Bainbridge and Lukas Clary from Weintraub Tobin's Labor and Employment Group dive into the California Supreme Court case Huerta vs. CSI Electrical Contractors. Discover the key takeaways for employers on compensable...more
On March 25, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Huerta v. CSI Electrical Contractors. This ruling provides important guidance as to what does and does not constitute sufficient employer control to make...more
The California Supreme Court recently issued its opinion in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services Inc., resolving a split of authority in California state and federal courts whether there is a “good faith” defense to claims...more
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