The California Supreme Court will soon hear oral argument on the much-anticipated Adolph (Erik) v. Uber Technologies, Inc., (Uber), accepting Justice Sotomayor’s invitation in Viking River Cruises
Continue Reading California Supreme Court to Have ‘Last Word’ on Viking River
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana gave California employers a brief reprieve from the onslaught of nonarbitrable Private Attorneys General Act claims.
Before then
Continue Reading How Unions Could Stem Possible Wave Of Calif. PAGA Claims
There might be a light flickering at the end of a dark tunnel California employers have been walking through for more than 15 years. In December 2021, California’s Secretary of
Continue Reading At Long Last: The End of the PAGA Era?
In Bernstein v. Virgin America, Inc., on February, 23, 2021, the Ninth Circuit issued a decision that’s a mixed bag for employers. Bernstein v. Virgin Am., Inc., No.
Continue Reading Ninth Circuit Grounds Imposition of ‘Subsequent’ PAGA Penalties Prior to Court or Labor Commissioner Citation, But Lets Waiting Time Penalties and Other Labor Code Violations Soar for Interstate Employers
On Wednesday, a panel of the California Court of Appeal’s First District unanimously held that venue for an action alleging violation of California’s Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) is proper
Continue Reading PAGA: It Doesn’t Matter Where You Live or Work
Yesterday, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in Kim v. Reins International California, Inc. and unanimously reversed the California Court of Appeal. The Court held an employee does not lose standing to pursue claims under the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”), Cal. Lab. Code § 2698 et seq., even when that employee settles his individual Labor Code claims asserted in that same action.
In Reins, the plaintiff claimed his employer had misclassified him as an exempt employee. He alleged the usual panoply of Labor Code claims (failure to pay overtime, failure to provide meal and rest breaks, failure to provide accurate wage statements, waiting time penalties) and sought civil penalties under the PAGA. The plaintiff later settled all of his individual claims, but not the PAGA claims.
Continue Reading PAGA Plaintiffs: No Injury, No Problem, Says Unanimous California Supreme Court
On Sept. 12, 2019, the California Supreme Court in ZB, N.A. v. Superior Court of San Diego County (Lawson) delivered a victory for California employers, clarifying that a plaintiff bringing
Continue Reading 2 Steps Forward, 1 Step Back: California Supreme Court Nixes Plaintiffs’ Ability to Recover Unpaid Wages Under PAGA, but Forecloses Defendants’ Path to Arbitration
On April 30, 2012, the California Supreme Court issued a decision holding that the fee shifting provisions of California Labor Code sections 128.5 and 1194 do not apply to claims for wages made pursuant California Labor Code section 226.7 for failure to authorize meal and/or rest periods. Kirby v. Immoos Fire Protection, Inc., ____ Cal. 4th ___ (2012).
Continue Reading California Supreme Court’s Kirby Decision: If Money Talks, is This Another Post-Brinker Blow to Meal and Rest Period Claims?