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
The First District Court of Appeal’s recently published decision, Allison v. Dignity Health, is a win for employers holding that broad reliance on time-clock data and expert surveys is insufficient to sustain class-wide...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
On April 21, 2025, a California Court of Appeal held employees working six hours or less in a single workday can prospectively waive their mandatory meal periods. The ruling provided clarification on a long-standing question:...more
California Labor Code section 512 guarantees a thirty (30) minute, off-duty, meal period for employees after five (5) work hours, and a second thirty (30) minute, off duty, meal period after ten (10) work hours. Section 512...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
On April 21, 2025, the California Court of Appeal issued an opinion validating written, prospective meal period waivers for non-exempt employees. The decision in La Kimba Bradsbery v. Vicar Operating, Inc. provides employers...more
The California Court of Appeal recently issued a significant decision affirming that employers and employees may mutually agree, in writing, to prospectively waive the employee’s meal period for shifts between five and six...more
In Bradsbery v. Vicar Operating, Inc., a California Court of Appeal answered a question that many California employers may not have known even needed to be answered—whether California employees can prospectively waive their...more
For over a decade, many California employers have issued written meal period waivers that permit employees to voluntarily agree to prospectively waive 30-minute meal periods throughout their employment and under certain...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
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
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
Employers in California often offer employees the ability to sign “meal period waivers,” usually at onboarding. These written waivers reflect the employee’s agreement, on a going-forward basis, to waive their first meal...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
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
In Gramajo v. Joe’s Pizza on Sunset, Inc., Case Nos. B322992/B323024 (Cal. App. Mar. 25, 2024), the California Court of Appeal held that employees who win in court on a claim for minimum or overtime wages must be awarded at...more
On January 18, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued a highly anticipated decision in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., determining whether trial courts can dismiss Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims as...more
This Holland & Knight Transportation Blog post provides an update on several developments of interest that impact motor carriers and their logistics operations. FMCSA Meal and Rest Break Rule Preempts California's "ABC...more