News & Analysis as of

California CA Supreme Court Employment Litigation

Fox Rothschild LLP

A Simple Payment Error is not a Waiver of the Right to Arbitrate

Fox Rothschild LLP on

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

Husch Blackwell LLP

California Supreme Court Tackles Federal Preemption Issues in Employment and Consumer Arbitrations

Husch Blackwell LLP on

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

CDF Labor Law LLP

CA Supreme Court Offers Relief to Employers For Unintentional Arbitration Fee Delays

CDF Labor Law LLP on

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

Buchalter

Late Fees, High Stakes: California Narrows Arbitration Fee Forfeiture Rule

Buchalter on

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

Blank Rome LLP

California Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument on 30-Day Arbitration Fee Rule: Key Takeaways from Hohenshelt

Blank Rome LLP on

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

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Will the California Supreme Court Put the Heads Back on Headless PAGA Suits?

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

CDF Labor Law LLP

California Supreme Court Clarifies Cost Shifting Under CCP Section 998

CDF Labor Law LLP on

The California Supreme Court has clarified how the cost-shifting provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 998 (“Section 998”) may apply when a case settles before trial. In a recent decision, Madrigal v....more

Epstein Becker & Green

California Court of Appeal Holds That Every PAGA Action Necessarily Includes an Individual PAGA Claim – and Plaintiffs With...

Following the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (2022) U.S. 639 and the California Supreme Court’s decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (2023) 14 Cal. 5th 1104, when...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

PAGA Paraphrased – Stone v. Alameda Health System

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court held that PAGA does not apply to public entity employers....more

CDF Labor Law LLP

No Showing of Prejudice Required to Argue Waiver of Right to Arbitration

CDF Labor Law LLP on

Many California employers require their employees to sign agreements to submit any disputes arising out their employment to binding arbitration. If an employee files a lawsuit in court, the employer then has the option of...more

Clark Hill PLC

California PAGA Reform Brings Employers Relief

Clark Hill PLC on

California employers can finally breathe a sigh of relief. The long-awaited and much-needed Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) reform has arrived. While the reform falls well short of the ballot initiative efforts to...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Supreme Court Confirms the “Knowing and Intentional” Standard of California’s Wage Statement Law Requires a “Knowing...

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

Littler

California Supreme Court Affirms Good-Faith Efforts May Shield Employers in Wage Statement Lawsuits

Littler on

In a favorable ruling for employers defending against wage statement compliance claims, the California Supreme Court in Naranjo v. Spectrum Services Inc. (Naranjo) settled an age-old dispute by determining that an employer...more

Conn Maciel Carey LLP

California Supreme Court Resolves Split Among Courts of Appeal, Finding Trial Courts Do Not Have the “Inherent Authority” to...

Conn Maciel Carey LLP on

On January 18, 2024, the California Supreme Court made a significant ruling in the case of Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., finding that the trial court lacked the inherent authority to dismiss a California’s Private...more

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

Trial Courts’ Tool Box Doesn’t Include PAGA Manageability Authority

In Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., the California Supreme Court jump-started 2024 with a boon to employees, ending trial courts’ inherent authority to dismiss unmanageable claims under the Private Attorneys’ General...more

Falcon Rappaport & Berkman LLP

Navigating the Challenges of California’s PAGA Law: Insights for Employers

California’s Private Attorneys’ General Act, or PAGA, just celebrated its 20th birthday despite repeated, failed attempts at its repeal. California’s Labor Code is among the strictest in the nation and California law affords...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Supreme Court Decision Limits Manageability Dismissals for PAGA Claims

For companies doing business in California, it’s important to be aware of the January 18, 2024 California Supreme Court decision in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc.*, which examined whether trial courts can strike PAGA...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Estrada Is Not a Death Knell to PAGA Defenses

On January 18, 2024, in a highly anticipated and unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of California barred striking a claim under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) on trial manageability grounds alone, instead...more

ArentFox Schiff

California Employers Face Feb. 14 Deadline and Tighter Non-Compete Prohibitions

ArentFox Schiff on

California has long had the most restrictive laws against employee non-compete agreements. Effective January 1, two new legislative bills, Senate Bill 699 and Assembly Bill 1076, tightened California’s restrictions even...more

Stoel Rives - World of Employment

California Supreme Court Sweeps PAGA Manageability Under the Rug in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills

On January 18, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills to decide the question of whether California trial courts have inherent authority to strike claims brought...more

Carlton Fields

California Courts Lack Authority to Strike PAGA Claims on Manageability Grounds, but Due Process Could Be a Ticket Out

Carlton Fields on

California employers lost the chance last week to have trial courts act as gatekeepers for the onslaught of Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) representative suits alleging wage and hour violations. Previously, some trial...more

CDF Labor Law LLP

[Webinar] When to Arbitrate PAGA Claims: Insights from Adolph v. Uber - September 26th, 10:00 am - 11:15 am PT

CDF Labor Law LLP on

Join us on September 26 for a comprehensive webinar hosted by CDF as we delve into the crucial subject of arbitrating PAGA claims, exploring its implications following the California Supreme Court's landmark decision in...more

Jenner & Block

California Supreme Court Breaks from Federal Precedent on PAGA

Jenner & Block on

The California Supreme Court issued a much-anticipated Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. in July, departing from the United States Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in Viking River...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Supreme Court Finds That an Employer’s Third Party Agents May Be Held Directly Liable for Violations of California’s...

On August 21, 2023, the California Supreme Court held in Raines v. U.S. Healthworks Medical Group that a business entity acting as an employer’s agent can be held directly liable under California’s Fair Employment and Housing...more

Mintz - Employment Viewpoints

California’s Highest Court Revisits Statutory PAGA Standing: What the Ruling Means for California Employers

The California Supreme Court has closed the door on the employer-friendly rule the U.S. Supreme Court set out in the case of Viking River Cruises Inc. v. Moriana. There, the Supreme Court held that employees could waive their...more

47 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide