The Journey of Litigation
Quick Guide to Administrative Hearings
Wire Fraud Litigants Beware: Fourth Circuit Ruling Protects the Banks — The Consumer Finance Podcast
Solicitors General Insights: The Tale of Two Washingtons — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
How confidential is a request to access or challenge information in INTERPOL’s files?
Understanding the Impact of IPR Estoppel and PTAB Discretionary Denials — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
The Presumption of Innocence Podcast: Episode 64 - Cages We Built: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America
Solicitors General Insights: The Legal Frontlines in Iowa and Indiana — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
The Briefing: The Ninth Circuit Puts the Brakes on Eleanor’s Copyright Claim
The Briefing: No CTRL-ALT-DEL For the Server Test
Navigating PTAB’s New Approach to IPR and PGR Discretionary Denial - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Solicitors General Insights: A Deep Dive With Mississippi and Tennessee Solicitors General — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
Update on the State of Non-compete Restrictions (LaborSpeak)
UPIC Audits
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Prominent Journalist, David Dayen, Describes his Reporting on the Efforts of Trump 2.0 to Curb CFPB
#WorkforceWednesday®: Federal Contractors Alert - DEI Restrictions Reinstated by Appeals Court - Employment Law This Week®
5 Key Takeaways | Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal)
Exploring Procedural Justice | Judge Steve Leben | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Handling Post-Conviction Death Penalty Cases Pro Bono | McKenzie Edwards | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Inside the Fourth Court of Appeals’ Clerk’s Office | Michael Cruz | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Retaliation Verdict Reversed Where Plaintiff Obtained No Relief - Can an employee prove retaliation at trial yet still recover nothing – not even attorney’s fees? According to a recent decision from the California Court of...more
The California Court of Appeal issued an important decision clarifying that an employee cannot recover damages for a defamation claim that is derivative of a wrongful termination claim. Defamation causes of action are often...more
The Second District Court of Appeal held that, under the pre-reform PAGA statute, an individual employee need not have been employed or experienced a Labor Code violation during the one-year PAGA limitations period to have...more
In a significant win for employers, the California Court of Appeal recently affirmed that prospective, revocable meal period waivers for shifts between five and six hours are lawful under both the Labor Code and applicable...more
In a surprisingly employer-friendly decision, the California Court of Appeal recently held that voluntary, prospective written meal waivers for shorter shifts, i.e., those that are more than five but no more than six hours in...more
A California Court of Appeal recently held that an employee bringing a claim under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) must be able to allege that he personally suffered a Labor Code violation within the applicable...more
On April 21, 2025, a California Court of Appeal affirmed the validity of prospective, written meal period waivers, so long as they are revocable and not coerced. The case, La Kimba Bradsbery et al. v. Vicar Operating,...more
In a decision with important implications for many pending Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) lawsuits, a California Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal of a representative PAGA action as untimely because the plaintiff did...more
What is a “blanket” or “prospective” meal period waiver? California employers can offer non-exempt employees the opportunity to (1) waive their first meal period if their work period does not exceed six hours or (2) waive...more
PAGA claims brought under pre-reform PAGA must be brought within one year of a Labor Code violation experienced by the plaintiff and because a PAGA claim necessarily has both an individual and a non-individual component,...more
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
In a significant ruling for employers, the California Court of Appeal has validated the use of “prospective” meal period waivers, allowing workers to voluntarily waive their meal breaks in advance, under certain conditions....more
The proliferation of wage and hour litigation in California and recent significant changes to the law have created uncertainty for employers and their lawyers alike. Both recent PAGA (Private Attorneys General Act of 2004)...more
On February 26, 2025, in Parra Rodriguez v. Packers Sanitation, Inc., the California Court of Appeal (Fourth Appellate District) issued the latest published decision addressing the practice of filing so-called “headless”...more
Two recent Private Attorney General Act (PAGA) cases underscore the importance of effectively using procedural motions in defending such cases. 1. Rodriguez v. Packers Sanitation Services LTD., LLC...more
In Villalva v. Bombardier Mass Transit Corp., employees Mark Villalva and Bobby Jason Yelverton initially filed a claim for unpaid wages relating to on-call pay with the Labor Commissioner’s office, who denied their claim and...more
California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) allows “aggrieved employees” to sue their employers for Labor Code violations to collect civil penalties “on behalf of himself or herself and other current or former...more
In yet another attempt to avoid arbitration agreements, plaintiffs’ lawyers in the wake of the blockbuster court decisions in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana and Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. began filing so-called...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court held that PAGA does not apply to public entity employers....more
In Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, the case’s second appearance before the California Supreme Court in two years, the Supreme Court confirmed that an employer does not incur civil penalties for failing to report unpaid...more
The New York Court of Appeals recently expanded the types of hazards encompassed by Industrial Code § 23-1.7(d). In so doing, the court increased the likelihood of Labor Law § 241(6) liability for property owners, contractors...more
For companies doing business in California, it’s important to be aware of the January 18, 2024 California Supreme Court decision in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc.*, which examined whether trial courts can strike PAGA...more
On January 18, 2024, in a highly anticipated and unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of California barred striking a claim under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) on trial manageability grounds alone, instead...more
In Harstein v. Hyatt Corp., the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that Hyatt Corporation (“Hyatt”) violated California law, which requires the payment of all wages at separation, when one of its hotels failed to pay...more
What Happens to the “Non-individual” PAGA Claims Now that Viking River Cruises Compels Arbitration of the “Individual” PAGA Claim? The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana was widely seen...more