The Current State of the Holder Rule: Friend or Foe? — Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast
Recent Developments in California's Arbitration Landscape — FCRA Focus Podcast
Lemon Law Shakeup: Rodriguez vs. FCA US Has Unexpected Result – Moving The Metal Podcast
California Employment News: Can Pre- and Post-Shift Activities Be Compensated (Podcast)
California Employment News: Can Pre- and Post-Shift Activities Be Compensated
This Am Law 50 senior counsel cements his authority through two appellate analytics blogs - Legally Contented Podcast
California Employment News: Premium Pay Constitutes Wages
#WorkforceWednesday: CA Whistleblower Retaliation Cases, NYC Pay Transparency Law, Biden’s Labor Agenda - Employment Law This Week®
AGG Talks: Background Screening - Redaction of Identifiers by the Courts Update, Breaking News from California
AGG Talks: Background Screening - Redaction of Identifiers by the Courts in Michigan and California Pose Challenges for Background Checks
On 11 August 2025, California employers scored some relief from a rigidly applied arbitration statute with the California Supreme Court’s highly anticipated decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court (Hohenshelt)....more
On August 11, 2025, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court and peeled away the draconian application of California's arbitration fee statute, California Civil Procedure Code §§...more
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
On August 7, 2025, the California Supreme Court (the Court) issued Opinion S283614 in the case Center For Biological Diversity, Inc. v. Public Utilities Commission regarding the degree of deference that courts should afford...more
I have some good news for California employers seeking to enforce arbitration agreements. The California Supreme Court just held that non-payment of arbitration fees does not automatically waive the right to arbitrate....more
The California Supreme Court’s recent decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court addressed whether California’s Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.98, which requires the party that drafted the arbitration agreement to pay...more
The California Supreme Court recently issued a significant decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, holding that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) does not preempt California laws requiring businesses to pay consumer or...more
On August 11, 2025, the California Supreme Court issued a decision in the matter of Dana Hohenshelt v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles, ruling that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) does not preempt the California...more
On August 7, 2025, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Center For Biological Diversity v. California Public Utilities Commission. The decision reversed the decision of a lower appellate court which had...more
Background: The Thirty-Day Arbitration Fee Rule - In 2019, the California legislature amended the California Arbitration Act (CAA) to require the party who drafts an arbitration agreement to pay all required arbitration...more
The California Supreme Court’s decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court marks an important moment for arbitration in California, particularly in the context of consumer disputes, employment disputes, and mass arbitrations....more
On Aug. 11, 2025, in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, the California Supreme Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act does not preempt California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1281.98. The statute, intended to deter the...more
The California Supreme Court issued its decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, addressing whether the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts California's rule governing late payment of arbitration fees, Cal. Code Civ....more
In its August 11, 2025 decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court (S284498), the California Supreme Court clarified the reach of Code of Civil Procedure Section 1281.98, the 30-day arbitration fee payment rule. While...more
In a recent decision, Center for Biological Diversity, Inc. v. Public Utilities Commission, the California Supreme Court unanimously rejected the "uniquely deferential" standard of review previously given to California Public...more
In a closely watched decision issued on July 21, 2025, the California Supreme Court, in EpicentRx, Inc. v. Superior Court, held that a forum selection clause requiring shareholder lawsuits to be brought in the Delaware Court...more
The Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Two (Riverside) in RND Contractors, Inc. v. Superior Court (2025) issued a significant published decision. The California Court of Appeal addressed a previously...more
The California Supreme Court upheld a shopping center cotenancy provision, which allowed the tenant to pay reduced rent if the center’s occupancy fell below a certain threshold, finding the lease provision was an enforceable...more
We have seen a rise in employees going on the offensive and suing their former employers for damages for not informing them that their noncompete is invalid under the applicable state law or for exaggerating the scope of a...more
In our previous article, “Pay Up or Lawsuit Up: The 30-Day Countdown That’s Fueling Arbitration Disputes,” we explored the legal and practical challenges posed by California’s 30-day arbitration fee payment rule, codified in...more
Since our last coverage of “headless PAGA lawsuits”—i.e., lawsuits in which a plaintiff disavows his individual PAGA claim and opts to pursue the claim only on behalf of others—significant developments have further...more
Key Takeaways - - In JJD-HOV Elk Grove, LLC v. Jo-Ann Stores, LLC, the Supreme Court of California upheld the validity of a cotenancy provision in a retail lease, affirming that in certain instances where clauses are drafted...more
Under the Subdivision Map Act, the creation of legal parcels prior to 1972 requires more than a deed referencing multiple lots—only a conveyance that separates a portion of land from contiguous property creates a new legal...more
Online businesses are increasingly facing a wave of arbitration demands under the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”) and similar laws. Enterprising law firms have been at the forefront of this trend, filing claims on...more
On April 24, 2025, the California Supreme Court ruled unanimously that a contract provision restricting liability for willful injury was unenforceable under California Civil Code section 1668. This decision was in response to...more