The Justice Insiders Podcast: Mutiny on the Bug Bounty
Propel: Under the hood with Uber
Jones Day Talks Health Care & Life Sciences: False Claims and Private Equity, and Rideshare Apps Race into Patient Transportation
The Week in FCPA-Episode 67, the Post Harvey Edition
Everything Compliance-Episode 13
This Week in FCPA-Episode 58, the Declination Edition
This Week in FCPA-Episode 57, the Father’s Day Edition
Compliance Into the Weeds-Episode 42, the Uber Edition
Employment Law This Week®: ACA Marketplace Notices, Payroll Card Regulations, Medical Marijuana, Uber’s Arbitration Agreements
FCPA Compliance and Ethics Report-Episode 174-Matt Kelly on Dodd-Frank, Uber and Upcoming Compliance Week events
In January 2021, Uber emailed millions of its users informing them that they would be prompted to agree to updated terms of use (available by hyperlinks) in order to continue using the ride-sharing service. The plaintiff, a...more
Character Technologies has been hit with two lawsuits, including a wrongful death suit (among other claims), in less than two months over its popular Character.ai chatbot. The first was filed in the U.S. District Court for...more
Addressing for the first time the validity of an arbitration agreement entered via an e-commerce application, the New York Court of Appeals recently held in Wu v Uber Technologies, Inc. that the email notification and...more
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois has rejected an argument that opting out of arbitration clauses precluded arbitration under prior arbitration agreements in a dispute between Uber drivers and...more
The Nevada Supreme Court recently reversed the denial of a motion to compel arbitration, explaining that the plaintiff’s arguments that the contract at issue was illegal were not a valid basis to deny arbitration because...more
Join us on September 26 for a comprehensive webinar hosted by CDF as we delve into the crucial subject of arbitrating PAGA claims, exploring its implications following the California Supreme Court's landmark decision in...more
The California Supreme Court recently rejected the U.S. Supreme Court’s interpretation of standing under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA). In Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., 532 P.3d 682 (Cal. 2023), the Court...more
On July 17, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., finally clarifying the question of what constitutes standing under California's Private Attorneys General Act...more
Following the United States Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Moriana v. Viking River Cruises, California courts were tasked with the open question of whether an “aggrieved” employee whose individual Private Attorneys...more
Last year, we discussed the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (“Viking River”), 596 U.S. [142 S.Ct. 1906] (2022), holding that an arbitration agreement between a...more
Recently, in Adolph v. Uber Tech., Inc., the California Supreme Court held that plaintiffs who proceed to arbitration on individual labor code claims do not lose standing to bring representative claims in court under the...more
In June 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana that (1) the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) requires the enforcement of an arbitration agreement that waives an employee’s...more
The California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited ruling in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. on July 17, 2023, holding that an employee can pursue a non-individual representative action under the Private Attorneys General...more
Highlights of Adolph v. Uber Tech., Inc. PAGA representatives retain standing to prosecute non-individual PAGA claims in court, even when their individual PAGA claims are compelled into arbitration....more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. With this decision California employers need to understand that plaintiffs do not lose standing when individual...more
Summary - The California Supreme Court held in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. that a plaintiff compelled to arbitrate an individual California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claim still maintains...more
Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an employer-friendly decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana. There, it held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts the California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA)...more
In Adolph v. Uber Technologies Inc., the California Supreme Court held that it is not bound by the US Supreme Court’s interpretation of state law in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana, ruling that an order compelling arbitration...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court issued its long-anticipated decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. and held that an employee who has been compelled to arbitrate “individual” claims under the California...more
The California Supreme Court in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. affirmed the key holding in the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana last year—the FAA requires PAGA plaintiffs to...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court unanimously held in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. that even if a plaintiff who brings a claim under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) has their individual...more
On July 17, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (Cal. Sup. Ct. Case No. S274671), in which it addressed whether a plaintiff who is compelled to arbitrate their individual...more
As we predicted (here), employees can be compelled to individually arbitrate their Labor Code claims under the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”), but an arbitration agreement that prohibits employees from...more
In a significant blow to employment-related arbitration agreements, the California Supreme Court ruled in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. that an employee has standing to bring non-individual, representative California...more