News & Analysis as of

State Labor Laws Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) Appeals

Jackson Lewis P.C.

California Court of Appeal Clarifies Sick Leave Calculation for Outside Sales Employees

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

A recent California Court of Appeal decision provides clarity for employers with commissioned outside sales employees. In Hirdman v. Charter Communications, the court confirmed that employers may calculate paid sick leave for...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

PAGA Paraphrased – CRST Expedited, Inc. v. Super. Ct.

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

The Fifth District Court of Appeal held that under pre-reform PAGA, headless PAGA actions in which plaintiffs seek civil penalties only on behalf of other employees and not for violations they personally experienced are...more

Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP

California Court of Appeal Decision in Rose v. Hobby Lobby: No Recovery of Costs Against Nonparticipating State Agency

On May 14, 2025, the California Court of Appeal issued a decision in Rose v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., addressing whether the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) can be held liable for an employer’s...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

PAGA Paraphrased – Osuna v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc.

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

The Second District Court of Appeal held that, under the pre-reform PAGA statute, an individual employee need not have been employed or experienced a Labor Code violation during the one-year PAGA limitations period to have...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

PAGA Paraphrased – Rose v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

The First District held that a prevailing defendant in a PAGA action may not recover litigation costs from the California Labor Workforce Development Agency when the LWDA did not participate in the litigation....more

Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP

California Court of Appeal Rejects "Headless" PAGA Claims in Williams v. Alacrity Solutions Group

In a significant development for California employers, the Court of Appeal in Williams v. Alacrity Solutions Group, LLC recently affirmed the dismissal of a Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) claim brought solely on...more

ArentFox Schiff

A PAGA Plaintiff Must Allege a Timely Individual Claim

ArentFox Schiff on

A California Court of Appeal recently held that an employee bringing a claim under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) must be able to allege that he personally suffered a Labor Code violation within the applicable...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

PAGA Paraphrased – Williams v. Alacrity Solutions Group, Inc.

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

PAGA claims brought under pre-reform PAGA must be brought within one year of a Labor Code violation experienced by the plaintiff and because a PAGA claim necessarily has both an individual and a non-individual component,...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

When Headless PAGAs Attack!

As we reported here, a split in authority has developed in the California Court of Appeal regarding what to do when an employer moves to compel arbitration of a Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) that is “headless”—that is,...more

Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP

Another Day, Another Dispute Between Appellate Courts Over Employment Arbitrations

The case of Parra Rodriguez v. Packers Sanitation Services LTD., LLC typifies the reason employers and employment counsel must stay on top of arbitration case developments....more

Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP

California Court Creates Appellate Split On ‘Headless’ PAGA Claims

A recent decision from the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District has created a split on whether employees can bring “headless” Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims.  “Headless” PAGA refers to the...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

PAGA Plaintiffs Cannot Avoid Arbitration by Bringing a “Headless PAGA Lawsuit”

California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) allows “aggrieved employees” to sue their employers for Labor Code violations to collect civil penalties “on behalf of himself or herself and other current or former...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

California Court of Appeal Says No More “Headless” PAGA Lawsuits

Ballard Spahr LLP on

In an effort to avoid arbitrating individual claims under the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”), a recent trend emerged in California litigation involving “headless” PAGA lawsuits. Essentially, plaintiffs would expressly...more

Polsinelli

California Court of Appeal Invalidates Headless PAGA Actions

Polsinelli on

In a decision with significant impact for employers defending Private Attorney General Act (PAGA) cases, a California 2nd District Court of Appeal panel ruled on December 30, 2024, that plaintiffs cannot circumvent...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

You Can’t Spell “Aggrieved Employees” Without an “I”: PAGA Claims Cannot be Headless

In yet another attempt to avoid arbitration agreements, plaintiffs’ lawyers in the wake of the blockbuster court decisions in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana and Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. began filing so-called...more

Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP

California Court of Appeal Leaves ‘Headless’ PAGA Claims Lifeless

In a significant development for California employers, the California Court of Appeal’s decision in Leeper v. Shipt, Inc. closed out 2024 by strengthening the enforceability of arbitration agreements in Private Attorneys...more

BakerHostetler

It’s Settled: A PAGA Plaintiff Has No Right to Intervene, Vacate or Object to Another PAGA Plaintiff’s Settlement, Affirms the...

BakerHostetler on

In a welcome win for employers, the California Supreme Court recently blocked a PAGA plaintiff’s attempt to intervene and object to another PAGA plaintiff’s proposed settlement as a matter of right, in Turrieta v. Lyft, Inc.,...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

California Supreme Court Limits Manageability Defense to PAGA Claims

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On January 18, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued a highly anticipated decision in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., determining whether trial courts can dismiss Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims as...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

The Case for a PAGA Adequacy Requirement

In Arias v. Superior Court, 46 Cal. 4th 969 (2009), the California Supreme Court ruled that Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) actions need not satisfy class action requirements, and in the fourteen years since, PAGA...more

Payne & Fears

Key California Employment Law Case Summaries: August 2023

Payne & Fears on

Summary -   Emergency Rule 9, which tolled statutes of limitations for six months due to the COVID-19 pandemic, is valid and operates to extend the time to file a civil suit for a PAGA claim as well as the time period to...more

Meyers Nave

Recent Developments Since the Viking River Cruises Decision: 5 Key Things California Employers Need To Know

Meyers Nave on

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

Proskauer - California Employment Law

Under-the-Radar Concessions in Adolph Could Shorten PAGA’s Parade Of Horribles

On May 10, 2023, the California Supreme Court heard oral argument in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., a closely watched case that will decide whether a Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) plaintiff loses standing to pursue...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

January 2023 California Employment Law Notes

Age/National Origin Case Was Properly Dismissed Despite “Direct Evidence” Of Discriminatory Animus - Opara v. Yellin, 57 F.4th 709 (9th Cir. 2023) - Joan Opara was terminated from her employment as an IRS revenue...more

Payne & Fears

Key California Employment Law Case Summaries: September, October, and November 2022

Payne & Fears on

Summary - Where an employer can and does track the exact time in minutes that its employees work each shift, and those records show that employees were not paid for all the time they worked, neutral time rounding is not a...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

Ninth Circuit Panel to Reconsider Decision Upholding California Mandatory Arbitration Ban

​​​​​​​The panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that largely upheld California’s law banning mandatory arbitration agreements in the employment context just withdrew its decision. On August 22, 2022, two of the three...more

45 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