The Presumption of Innocence Podcast: Episode 20 - Pitfalls and Perils: Employee Retention Credit Enforcement Trends
Breaking Down Bad Faith: Insurers’ Good Faith Duties and Defending Bad Faith Claims
Podcast: No Surprises Act: New Rules and Guidance for Stakeholders (Part 2) - Diagnosing Health Care
Advancing Agriculture: Security Interests and Article 9 Challenges (Part 2)
New Developments in the World of Section 230
On-Demand Webinar | Employment Issues With a COVID-19 Vaccine
Is the Aseracare precedent in jeopardy? Courts Questioning Clinical Judgment Standards
Is the Aseracare Precedent in Jeopardy? Courts Questioning Clinical Judgment Standards
Relaxed HIPAA Restrictions For Providers Using Telehealth
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 70: Tackling a California Bar Exam Essay: Criminal Law and Procedure
IAPP Global Privacy Summit Recap, Big Questions, and Indiana Jones Analogies
I-21 – Sexual Harassment (Still), Political Tweeting, and Intersectional Discrimination
When is an employer’s violation of providing employees with wage statements knowing and intentional, triggering financial penalties? Taking its second look at the case, the California Supreme Court ruled that an...more
In a significant victory for employers, the California Supreme Court recently held that if an employer reasonably and in good faith believed it was providing complete and accurate wage statements in compliance with wage...more
In Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., Case No. S279397 (May 6, 2024), the California Supreme Court held that if an employer reasonably and in good faith believed it was providing a complete and accurate wage...more
In a favorable ruling for employers defending against wage statement compliance claims, the California Supreme Court in Naranjo v. Spectrum Services Inc. (Naranjo) settled an age-old dispute by determining that an employer...more
On May 6, 2024, California LawCalifornia’s Supreme Court, in a rare and surprising “employer friendly” decision, held that an employer can avoid penalties under California’s wage statement law, Cal. Lab. Code § 226, if it...more
On May 6, 2024, the Supreme Court of California held that when an employer “reasonably and in good faith” believes it complied with California’s legal requirement to provide accurate wage statements and it does not, the...more
Earlier this week, a unanimous California Supreme Court held that employers have a viable good faith defense to claims for statutory penalties arising out of wage statement violations. The Court's decision, in Naranjo v....more
The Question - The basics of California’s wage statement requirements should be familiar to employers. The consequences for failing to comply with these requirements can be severe....more
This week, the California Supreme Court filed a decision in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., S279397, holding that “an employer’s objectively reasonable, good faith belief that it has provided employees with...more
In a rare victory for employers, the California Supreme Court unanimously held in Naranjo v. Spectrum Sec. Serv., Inc., S279397 (Decided 6 May 2024) that an employer’s “objectively reasonable, good faith belief” that it has...more
The California Supreme Court concluded that the “good faith” defense applies to claims seeking to impose penalties under California Labor Code section 226. An employee must show that an employer’s failure to comply with...more
Employers finally received some welcome news from the California Supreme Court Monday and now have a better shot of successfully using a “good faith” defense to wage-and-hour lawsuits. According to the ruling, if an employer...more
Almost exactly one year ago, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Gustavo Naranjo v Spectrum Security Services, Inc. (“Naranjo”), reviewing a decision by the Second Appellate District (the “Appellate Court”) in...more
Last year, in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., 13 Cal.5th 93 (2022), the California Supreme Court held that an employer’s failure to timely pay premium pay for meal and rest break violations could subject the...more
If you are in the business of buying or selling pork-based products, then you have probably heard of California’s Proposition 12. As it pertains to pork, the law requires that pig confinement systems are large enough to...more
On July 29, 2021, the California Supreme Court issued a major anti-SLAPP decision in Bonni v. St. Joseph Health System et al. The decision is both encouraging and disappointing for California medical staffs and the hospitals...more
In recent case of United Riggers and Erectors, Inc. v. Coast Iron and Steel Company ___ Cal. 4th ___ (May 14, 2018 Case No. S231549), the California Supreme Court addressed whether a direct contractor can withhold payment...more
On May 14, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in United Riggers & Erectors, Inc. v. Coast Iron & Steel Co., No. S231549, slip. op. (Cal. Sup. Ct. May 14, 2018). In it, the Court narrowly construed the “good...more
It is industry standard in California for owners of a construction project to make monthly payments to a contractor for work it has completed, less a certain percentage that is withheld as a guarantee of future satisfactory...more