I-13 – Policies, Policies, Policies, and Microchips Embedded in Employees
In California, Arbitration Agreement Valid Despite Lack of Rules - Why it matters: California employers scored a victory with the Peng decision, with the court making clear that a procedural error in failing to include...more
The California Supreme Court recently clarified the defenses available to employers defending against claims of discrimination. In Harris v. City of Santa Monica, No. BC341469 (Cal. Feb. 7, 2013), the court ruled that, if a...more
In a partial victory for employers, the California Supreme Court ruled in Harris v. City of Santa Monica that even when an employee proves that a discriminatory motive was a “substantial factor” in an adverse employment...more
On February 7, 2013, the California Supreme Court issued a long-awaited decision on whether the “mixed-motive” defense applies to employment discrimination claims under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA)....more