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
Petitioners were not “successful parties” entitled to attorneys’ fees under Code of Civil Procedure 1021.5 after the Legislature abrogated their legal victories by statute and the Supreme Court reversed the judgment. Make UC...more
This case involves the (much-litigated) issue currently pending before the California Supreme Court in Leeper v. Shipt, Inc., 107 Cal. App. 5th 1001, rev. granted (2025): Does the version of PAGA in effect from 2016 to...more
The California Supreme Court recently issued an opinion that serves as an important reminder to employers: good intentions regarding compliance with wage laws are not enough to avoid liquidated damages for minimum wage...more
On the heels of the California Supreme Court’s ruling in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, the California Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Wilson v. TAP Worldwide, LLC has provided welcome clarity and significant breathing...more
In Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, the California Supreme Court held that Section 1281.98 of the California Arbitration Act (CAA) is not preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). Section 12.81.98 provides that if a party...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
The California Supreme Court recently granted employers a modicum of relief from the harsh consequences of an employer’s failure to timely pay required arbitration fees within the 30-day deadline imposed by California Code of...more
Hohenshelt v. Golden State Foods Corp., 18 Cal. 5th 310 (2025) - In this closely watched case, the California Supreme Court held that California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1281.98 — a do-or-die statute requiring...more
When it comes to minimum wage law violations in California, employers should take note that ignorance of the law has been ruled out as a valid good-faith defense to an award of liquidated damages. In Iloff v. LaPaille, the...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
On 11 August 2025, California employers scored some relief from a rigidly applied arbitration statute with the California Supreme Court’s highly anticipated decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court (Hohenshelt)....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
On August 7, 2025, the California Supreme Court (the Court) issued Opinion S283614 in the case Center For Biological Diversity, Inc. v. Public Utilities Commission regarding the degree of deference that courts should afford...more
The California Supreme Court’s recent decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court addressed whether California’s Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.98, which requires the party that drafted the arbitration agreement to pay...more
After years of appellate cases and several rulings holding California employers to the very strict payment standards of the California Arbitration Act (CAA), the California Supreme Court has, for the first time, addressed...more
The California Supreme Court recently issued a significant decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, holding that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) does not preempt California laws requiring businesses to pay consumer or...more
On August 11, 2025, the California Supreme Court issued a decision in the matter of Dana Hohenshelt v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles, ruling that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) does not preempt the California...more
The California Supreme Court recently held in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) does not preempt a California law that penalizes businesses that have consumer and employee arbitration...more
On August 7, 2025, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Center For Biological Diversity v. California Public Utilities Commission. The decision reversed the decision of a lower appellate court which had...more
The California Supreme Court’s decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court marks an important moment for arbitration in California, particularly in the context of consumer disputes, employment disputes, and mass arbitrations....more
On Aug. 11, 2025, in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, the California Supreme Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act does not preempt California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1281.98. The statute, intended to deter the...more
The use of arbitration clauses in employment and consumer-related contracts is ubiquitous. California law requires companies facing employment and consumer claims in arbitration to pay arbitration fees and costs within 30...more
The California Supreme Court issued its decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, addressing whether the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts California's rule governing late payment of arbitration fees, Cal. Code Civ....more
In its August 11, 2025 decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court (S284498), the California Supreme Court clarified the reach of Code of Civil Procedure Section 1281.98, the 30-day arbitration fee payment rule. While...more
In a recent decision, Center for Biological Diversity, Inc. v. Public Utilities Commission, the California Supreme Court unanimously rejected the "uniquely deferential" standard of review previously given to California Public...more