Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: “Accidental Arbitration” -- A New Theory that Would Rein in Consumer Arbitration Clauses and the Scope of the FAA
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: A Discussion of Industry and Consumer Perspectives on Mass Arbitration
California Employment News: The State of Mandatory Arbitration Agreements in California Employment
Podcast: California Employment News - The State of Mandatory Arbitration Agreements in California Employment
#WorkforceWednesday: NLRB Focuses on Severance Agreements, Supreme Court Opens Overtime to HCEs, Ninth Circuit Rejects CA's Mandatory Arbitration Ban - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Rules on PAGA, Fifth Circuit Rules on COVID-19 Under WARN, Illinois Expands Bereavement Leave - Employment Law This Week®
California Employment News: US Supreme Court “Viking River” Decision Brings PAGA Relief for CA Employers
#WorkforceWednesday: EEOC COVID-19 Charges Surge, NYC’s Pay Transparency Law, SCOTUS Considers PAGA - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday: New Law on Arbitration of Sexual Harassment Claims, Cyber War Ramps Up, Salaried Nonexempt Status - Employment Law This Week®
Employment Law Now VI-114-Banning Arbitration of Sexual Harassment/Assault Claims
Update and Discussion on Legal and Practical Issues
DE Under 3: OFCCP Contractor Portal & Request for Comments for Functional Affirmative Action Programs (FAAPs)
Employment Law This Week®: FAA Arguably Preempts California Law, New CA Employment Laws for 2020, CA Consumer Privacy Act Amended
In the recent decision in Sanders v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, the California Court of Appeal reinforced the consequences for employers who fail to timely pay arbitration fees in employment disputes....more
As we have reported time and again, California courts have applied extra scrutiny to employee arbitration agreements in recent years, and have not hesitated to deny arbitration where there is a reasonable basis for doing so. ...more
Prior to the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises Inc. v. Moriana, California courts did not consider the components of a Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) claim. ...more
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
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court decided an important state law issue raised by the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S. Ct. 1906 (2022). Viking River Cruises...more
In June 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana that (1) the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) requires the enforcement of an arbitration agreement that waives an employee’s...more
The California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited ruling in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. on July 17, 2023, holding that an employee can pursue a non-individual representative action under the Private Attorneys General...more
We previously blogged about Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that individual employee claims under California’s Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) are subject to...more
California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) authorizes current and former employees to bring a representative action for civil penalties on behalf of the state against an employer for Labor Code violations committed...more
Summary - The California Supreme Court held in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. that a plaintiff compelled to arbitrate an individual California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claim still maintains...more
In Adolph v. Uber Technologies Inc., the California Supreme Court held that it is not bound by the US Supreme Court’s interpretation of state law in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana, ruling that an order compelling arbitration...more
California employers’ short-lived victory in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana last June was substantially undone on Monday by the California Supreme Court’s decision in Adolph v. Uber...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court ruled that where an employee has brought a California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) action that is comprised of both individual and non-individual claims, a court order...more
The California Supreme Court in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. affirmed the key holding in the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana last year—the FAA requires PAGA plaintiffs to...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court has held that a plaintiff whose individual PAGA claims are compelled to arbitration retains standing to pursue representative PAGA claims in court. Adolph v. Uber Technologies,...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court held that a plaintiff whose individual PAGA claims are compelled to arbitration retains standing to pursue representative PAGA claims in court in Adolph v. Uber Technologies,...more
As anticipated, earlier this week, the California Supreme Court broke from the U.S. Supreme Court’s Viking River Cruises v. Moriana decision, and further tipped the scales in favor of PAGA plaintiffs in California by holding...more
On July 17, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (Cal. Sup. Ct. Case No. S274671), in which it addressed whether a plaintiff who is compelled to arbitrate their individual...more
In June of last year, the United States Supreme Court held in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana that a plaintiff in an action under the Private Attorney General Act (“PAGA”) loses standing to pursue claims on behalf of...more
What Happens to the “Non-individual” PAGA Claims Now that Viking River Cruises Compels Arbitration of the “Individual” PAGA Claim? The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana was widely seen...more
California’s Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”) allows employees to act as an “agent” of the State of California and recover civil penalties for violations of the Labor Code through a civil action filed on behalf...more
Several developments have surfaced in the past few months regarding PAGA standing in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Viking River Cruises decision. Payne & Fears is hosting an interactive, in-person event that aims to...more
Last week, the Ninth Circuit issued a significant ruling in Chamber of Commerce v. Bonta, concluding that California’s Assembly Bill 51 (“AB 51”) is preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”). AB 51, which was passed by...more
Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s June decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, employers in California have awaited further guidance by federal courts regarding the scope and impact of this key decision that ruled...more
Many employers looked to the Supreme Court last term for clarity in cases with a significant impact on the workplace. The justices continued to shape the employment law landscape by ruling on an array of issues involving...more