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
A recent California Court of Appeal decision provides clarity for employers with commissioned outside sales employees. In Hirdman v. Charter Communications, the court confirmed that employers may calculate paid sick leave for...more
Allison v. Dignity Health, 112 Cal. App. 5th 192 (2025) - Two former registered nurses filed a putative class action against their former employer, alleging various wage and hour claims...more
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
On May 14, 2025, the California Court of Appeal issued a decision in Rose v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., addressing whether the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) can be held liable for an employer’s...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
The First District held that a prevailing defendant in a PAGA action may not recover litigation costs from the California Labor Workforce Development Agency when the LWDA did not participate in the litigation....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
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, 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
We invite you to review our newly-posted, March 2025 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law....more
The California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District recently issued a clarifying decision in Michelle Arzate, et al. v. ACE American Insurance Company, addressing which party is responsible for initiating arbitration...more
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
The California Court of Appeal recently reminded employers in an unpublished (but nonetheless chastening) opinion of the importance of carefully drafting arbitration agreements. In Pich v. LaserAway, LLC et al, the court...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