False Claims Act Insights - Beyond Adversarialism: How to Steer FCA Investigations
Hospice Insights Podcast - Hospice Audit Updates: Hospices Fare Well in Federal Court
Nationwide FLSA Lawsuits Just Got Harder—Here’s Why - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
Daily Compliance News: August 1, 2025, The All AI Edition
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
(Podcast) The Briefing: The Ninth Circuit Puts the Brakes on Eleanor’s Copyright Claim
The Briefing: The Ninth Circuit Puts the Brakes on Eleanor’s Copyright Claim
(Podcast) The Briefing: No CTRL-ALT-DEL For the Server Test
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
Key Points: No formal liability for payment of work-related medical expenses is triggered on the part of the employer/insurer until such expenses are properly submitted in accordance with the terms and provisions of the...more
The recent Barahona v. ABM Janitorial Services (2024) 53 CWCR 4, decision sheds light on a common but often misunderstood issue in California workers’ compensation: how liability is shared among multiple employers and...more
On July 11, 2023, the California Court of Appeal in Thai v. IBM held that whether an employer is obligated to reimburse expenses incurred by an employee working from home turns on whether the expenses were a direct...more
On June 13, 2022, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held in Johnson v. WinCo Foods Holdings, Inc, et al. that class members who were not yet employed by WinCo were not entitled to compensation for the time required to take a...more
A federal appeals court recently affirmed a summary judgment entered in favor of WinCo Foods in a class action alleging that WinCo should have reimbursed successful job applicants for the time and travel expenses they...more
This week, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that an employer’s per diem expense reimbursement payments functioned as compensation for work rather than business expense reimbursements. As a result, the employer was...more
In Townley v. BJ’s Restaurants, Inc., a California Court of Appeal ruled that California’s business expense reimbursement law does not require an employer to reimburse its employees for the cost of slip-resistant shoes...more
Now that sports betting has been legalized by the Supreme Court, I might want to consider laying some action on an upcoming game, because I am on fire with my recent predictions. In a blog post from last week, I correctly...more
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that expert witness fees are not recoverable under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). In Gortat v. Capala Brothers, Inc., No. 14-3304-cv (July 29, 2015), the Second Circuit...more
In August 2014, the California State Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit, Division 2) decided in Cochran v. Schawan's Home Service that employers were responsible for reimbursing employees for the business use of personal cell...more
The California Supreme Court has denied a petition to review Cochran v. Schwan’s Home Service, Inc., Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, Division Two, No. B247160 (August 12, 2014). As a result of the...more
The California Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Cochran v. Schwan’s Home Service, Inc. was simple. When employees must use their personal cell phones for work, California law requires employers to reimburse them,...more
In Cochran v. Schwan's Home Service Inc., the California Court of Appeals posed the following question: "Does an employer always have to reimburse an employee for the reasonable expense of the mandatory use of a personal cell...more
In a ruling that may spawn a wave of California employment-related class action litigation, a California Court of Appeal has ruled that employers must always reimburse employees for “some reasonable percentage” of their cell...more
On Tuesday, August 12, 2014, the California Court of Appeal (Second Appellate District) published a decision that could impact many employers in California. The threshold question at issue in the case was whether an employer...more
Labor Code section 2802 requires an employer to reimburse an employee who uses a personal cell phone for work-related calls, according to the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District....more