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 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
On April 24, 2025, the California Supreme Court held that contract clauses that limit damages for injuries caused by willful tortious conduct are prohibited by Section 1668 of the California Civil Code....more
In Truck Ins. Exch. v. Kaiser Cement, 321 Cal. Rptr. 3d 761, 549 P.3d 781 (2024), the California Supreme Court answered the question left open by Montrose Chem. Corp. v. Superior Ct., 9 Cal. 5th 215 (2020) (Montrose III): for...more
A U.S. District Court in the Southern District of California recently held that a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 offer of judgment must clearly state that attorneys’ fees and costs are limited or waived, as Arvest Central...more
In a unanimous opinion, the California Supreme Court answered two questions posed to it by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal, finding that an employer is not liable for a COVID-19 injury sustained by an employee’s household...more
In a long-awaited opinion — Siry Investment, L.P. v. Farkhondehpour — the California Supreme Court held that California Penal Code section 496 can apply to a business dispute. The opinion resolves a split of authority among...more
NFT creators should craft strategies to avoid minting or auctioning NFTs that use the likeness of an individual without their consent. As non-fungible tokens (NFTs) increase in popularity, the so-called common law “right of...more
With the advent of California’s Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA), employees can step into the shoes of a state attorney general and bring lawsuits against their employers, seeking civil penalties for Labor Code...more
In a surprising decision, the California Supreme Court has ruled that Plaintiffs in Private Attorney General Act (PAGA) cases cannot recover for their own or their fellow employees’ unpaid wages, but instead are limited to...more
California employers just won a major victory this week when the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in ZB, N.A. v. Superior Court. The exposure in Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) cases was...more
A few months ago, we reported on a Court of Appeal decision, Bottini v. City of San Diego, where the Court held that delays resulting from a governmental agency’s improper denial of a permit application for a new development...more
As we have previously reported, the California Supreme Court in Property Reserve, Inc. v. Superior Court (2016) 1 Cal.5th 151, ruled that the California statutes allowing precondemnation entry by the government to test and...more
On July 21, 2016, the California Supreme Court in Property Reserve v. Superior Court upheld the state’s precondemnation entry and testing statutes provided they were reformed to allow impacted property owners the ability to...more
Last month, the California Supreme Court’s decision in Property Reserve v. Superior Court provided long-awaited certainty for public agencies after a court of appeal determined the often-used “right of entry” statutes failed...more
For the last two-plus years, we have been waiting for guidance from the California Supreme Court on whether public agencies could utilize the statutory “right of entry” procedure to gain access to private property to conduct...more
There have been subsequent developments in several cases about which we have posted in recent months. On April 27, 2016, the California Supreme Court denied review in Casey v. Kaiser Gypsum Co., a case in which the...more