News & Analysis as of

CA Supreme Court Employer Liability Issues Appeals

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

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

Proskauer Rose LLP

Future Not Looking Bright For California Employee Nonsolicits

Proskauer Rose LLP on

On Jan. 1, new legislation aimed at curbing the use of unenforceable noncompete agreements took effect in California. The new laws, which impose potentially harsh consequences on employers for requiring employees to sign...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

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

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

ArentFox Schiff

Class Actions Quarterly Update: Labor and Employment - September 2021

ArentFox Schiff on

Ferra v. Loews Hollywood Hotel, LLC, 2021 WL 2965438 (July 15, 2021) - On July 15, 2021, the California Supreme Court issued a long-awaited decision, Ferra v. Loews Hollywood Hotel, LLC, regarding the rate at which premium...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Manageability – a New Weapon to Stave Off Unmanageable PAGA Claims

On September 9, 2021, California’s Court of Appeal issued an important decision in Wesson v. Staples The Office Superstore, LLC (“Wesson”), holding that trial courts have discretion to strike claims brought under the Private...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

Payne & Fears

Key California Employment Law Cases: February 2020

Payne & Fears on

Frlekin v. Apple, Inc., -- Cal. -- (2020) - Summary:  The time employees spent on Apple’s premises waiting for and undergoing a mandatory exit search of personal belongings was compensable as “hours worked” under Wage...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

Defamation and Wrongful Termination Claims Against the Los Angeles Times Were Properly Dismissed

Rall v. Tribune 365, LLC, 2019 WL 6887261 (Cal. Ct. App. 2019) - Frederick Theodore Rall III, a political cartoonist and blogger, sued the Los Angeles Times after it published a “note to readers” and (later) a more...more

Payne & Fears

California Court of Appeal Provides Further Clarity on Scope of Dynamex

Payne & Fears on

Ever since the California Supreme Court issued its groundbreaking decision in Dynamex Operations W., Inc. v. Superior Ct., 4 Cal. 5th 903 (2018), we have been monitoring its application by the lower courts. On October 8,...more

Littler

Dynamex Retroactivity Question Sent to California State Court

Littler on

On September 24, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit certified to the Supreme Court of California the question of whether that court’s landmark 2018 decision in Dynamex v. Superior Court should be applied...more

64 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

"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