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
8/26/2025
/ Appeals ,
CA Supreme Court ,
California ,
Defense Strategies ,
Employees ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Good Faith ,
Labor Commissioners ,
Labor Law Violations ,
Minimum Wage ,
Paid Sick Leave ,
Paid Time Off (PTO) ,
State Labor Laws ,
Statutory Interpretation ,
Wage and Hour
The California Labor Code generally requires that employers provide meal periods to non-exempt employees working more than five hours. However, the Labor Code provides that meal periods can be waived by agreement of the...more
4/24/2025
/ Appeals ,
California ,
Class Action ,
Employee Rights ,
Employment Litigation ,
Labor Code ,
Non-Exempt Employees ,
Rest and Meal Break ,
State Labor Laws ,
Wage and Hour ,
Wage Orders ,
Waivers
The California Court of Appeal held that after the employer-defendant successfully moved to compel arbitration of the plaintiffs’ employment-related claims, the employer-defendant did not waive its right to arbitration by...more
2/25/2025
/ Appeals ,
Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
California ,
Class Action ,
Dispute Resolution ,
Employees ,
Employment Contract ,
Employment Litigation ,
Labor Law Violations ,
Motion to Compel ,
Wage and Hour
Employees who sign an arbitration agreement with one company cannot avoid arbitration with related defendant-companies by arguing they were not parties to the agreement. The California Court of Appeal held that claims against...more
12/11/2024
/ Appeals ,
Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
Class Action ,
Contract Terms ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Contract ,
Employment Litigation ,
Equitable Estoppel ,
Grocery Store Workers ,
Grocery Stores ,
Labor Law Violations ,
Motion to Compel ,
Non-Signatories ,
Wage and Hour
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Court of Appeal held that separate arbitration and confidentiality agreements that were executed simultaneously during initial hiring should be read together, such that the unconscionability...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Court of Appeal affirmed an order denying an employer’s motion to compel arbitration because the employer failed to authenticate the employee’s electronic signature on the arbitration agreement....more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court held that the Labor Management Relations Act does not preempt claims under the Labor Code where a defense requires little more than referring to a collective bargaining...more
5/1/2019
/ Appeals ,
Arbitration ,
CA Supreme Court ,
Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA) ,
Contract Interpretation ,
Employment Litigation ,
Hiring & Firing ,
Labor Code ,
Labor-Managment Relations Act ,
Motion to Compel ,
Preemption ,
Reversal ,
Section 201 ,
Section 301 ,
Trial Court Orders ,
Unions ,
Unpaid Wages ,
Wage and Hour
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Court of Appeal, in Savea v. YRC Inc., held that an employer complies with Labor Code section 226(a)(8) when the employing entity lists its fictitious business name on a wage statement rather than the...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: An employer did not incur waiting time penalties for inadvertently misstating the amount of pay on a final paycheck, but was liable for its delay in correcting the error. And, by taking an appeal from a...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In Ly v. County of Fresno, the Court of Appeal held that correctional officers’ claims for race, ethnicity, and national origin discrimination were barred because the claims had been previously denied in...more
10/18/2017
/ Appeals ,
Claim Preclusion ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Department of Corrections ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
FEHA ,
Harassment ,
Jurisdiction ,
National Origin Discrimination ,
Police ,
Race Discrimination ,
Res Judicata ,
Retaliation ,
Summary Judgment ,
Workers' Compensation Claim ,
Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB)
California courts generally favor forum selection clauses entered into freely by parties and where enforcement is not unreasonable. This general principle is true even if the forum selection clause is “mandatory” and requires...more