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 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 11, 2025, the Supreme Court of California ruled that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) does not preempt a state statute requiring employers to timely pay arbitration fees or forfeit the right to arbitration. The...more
In a highly anticipated decision, the California Supreme Court in Dana Hohenshelt v. Golden State Foods Corp. relieves some pressure for employers, holding that late payment of arbitration fees does not result in an automatic...more
The California Supreme Court recently held in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) does not preempt a California law that penalizes businesses that have consumer and employee 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
The use of arbitration clauses in employment and consumer-related contracts is ubiquitous. California law requires companies facing employment and consumer claims in arbitration to pay arbitration fees and costs within 30...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
The California Supreme Court handed a major victory to Delaware corporations facing shareholder litigation in California courts but left open questions about how durable the success will be. In EpicentRX v. Superior Court...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
Less than a year ago, the California Supreme Court in Ramirez v. Charter Communications, Inc. opined, in the context of employment arbitration agreements, that there is no bright line rule that requires a court to refuse...more
On December 19, 2024, the Supreme Court of California passed down a unanimous decision in a lawsuit closely watched by commercial real estate landlords and retail tenants that involved the validity of so-called cotenancy...more
The California Supreme Court weighed in on the validity of commercial lease co-tenancy provisions with its recent opinion in JJD-HOV Elk Grove, LLC v. Jo-Ann Stores, LLC. A commercial lease co-tenancy clause conditions a...more
In 2003, the California Supreme Court adopted a stringent test to determine whether an employer had waived its right to compel arbitration of an employee’s claims. The most critical, and often determinative, factor was...more
In August 2000, the California Supreme Court handed down a landmark ruling that changed the face of employment arbitration agreements going forward. That case, known as Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services,...more
On July 15, 2024, the Supreme Court of California issued a decision that could provide courts in the state with significant discretion to refuse to enforce employment arbitration agreements even if only one term is determined...more
In a recent decision, the California Supreme Court held that courts cannot refuse to enforce arbitration agreements simply by finding that three or more provisions are unconscionable. Rather, courts must use a three-prong...more
Recently, Professor Ann Lipton wrote that the California Supreme Court has granted review of EpicentRx, In.c v. Superior Court, 95 Cal. App. 5th 890 (2023), review granted 539 P.3d 118 (2023). This was a case that I...more
For decades, California has taken arguably the most pro-employee-mobility position on noncompetition and non-solicitation agreements in the country – generally, post-employment noncompetition and non-solicitation agreements...more
Part Two of a Series - Payne & Fears’ Business Litigation Group helps businesses and their owners with wide-ranging disputes. In our practice, we’ve noticed that in disputes among business partners there are common issues...more
California Civil Code Section 1671 provides that a liquidated damages provision is either presumptively valid or invalid depending upon the subject matter of the contract. If the contract involves “the retail purchase, or...more
On June 30, 2022, the Supreme Court of California issued a decision in Grande v. Eisenhower Medical Center, No. S261247, that could have a far-reaching impact on the relationships between staffing companies and their clients....more
California Supreme Court Applies Independent Contractor Standard Retroactively; Does Not Reach Applicability to Franchises - The California Supreme Court has held that its Dynamex decision applies retroactively, answering...more
The American economy’s capitalist features promote the need for healthy business competition. One of the judiciary’s jobs has been to draw lines as to when that competition goes too far, without stifling legitimate...more
Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru, 140 S. Ct. 2049 (2020) - Summary: The ministerial exception, grounded in First Amendment’s religion clauses, barred teachers’ employment discrimination claims where teachers...more
In Gavaldon v. DaimlerChrysler Corp. (2004) 32 Cal. 4th 1246, the California Supreme Court found that service contracts are not express warranties under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act and the Act did not otherwise...more