Regulatory Rollback: CFPB’s Withdrawal of Informal Guidance Sparks New Litigation Dynamics – The Consumer Finance Podcast
Legal Implications of the Supreme Court's Ruling on Universal Injunctions
The Presumption of Innocence Podcast: Episode 65 -The Power of Interpretation: Constitutional Meaning in the Modern World
The Presumption of Innocence Podcast: Episode 64 - Cages We Built: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America
Solicitors General Insights: A Deep Dive With Mississippi and Tennessee Solicitors General — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Prof. Hal Scott Doubles Down on His Argument That CFPB is Unlawfully Funded Because of Combined Losses at Federal Reserve Banks
Hospice Insights Podcast - What a Difference No Deference Makes: Courts No Longer Bow to Administrative Agencies
False Claims Act Insights - How a Marine Fisheries Dispute Opened an FCA Can of Worms
The Loper Bright Decision - What Really Happened to Chevron and What's Next
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 210: Impacts of the Chevron Doctrine Ruling with Mark Moore and Michael Parente of Maynard Nexsen
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: The Demise of the Chevron Doctrine – Part II
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: The Demise of the Chevron Doctrine – Part I
In That Case: Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo
Regulatory Uncertainty: Benefits-Related Legal Challenges in a Post-Chevron World — Troutman Pepper Podcast
The End of Chevron Deference: Implications of the Supreme Court's Loper Bright Decision — The Consumer Finance Podcast
Down Goes Chevron: A 40-Year Precedent Overturned by the Supreme Court – Diagnosing Health Care
#WorkforceWednesday® - Chevron Deference Overturned - Employment Law This Week®
AGG Talks: Healthcare Insights Podcast - Episode 3: The Future of Agency Deference in Healthcare Regulation
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Supreme Court Hears Two Cases in Which the Plaintiffs Seek to Overturn the Chevron Judicial Deference Framework: Who Will Win and What Does It Mean? Part II
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Will Chevron Deference Survive in the U.S. Supreme Court? An Important Discussion to Hear in Advance of the January 17th Oral Argument
In Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, the California Supreme Court held that California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1281.98—a do-or-die statute requiring employers to pay arbitration fees within 30 days or waive the right to...more
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
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
Case Background - A sanitation employee at Golden State Foods Corporation, signed an arbitration agreement governed by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) at the start of his employment. In 2020, after reporting alleged...more
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
CRST Expedited, Inc. v. Superior Court, 2025 WL 1874891 (Cal. Ct. App. 2025) - Espiridion Sanchez filed this PAGA action against his former employer on behalf of himself and other allegedly “aggrieved employees.”...more
While we are waiting for the CA Supreme Court in Leeper v. Shipt to address whether “headless” PAGA claims (i.e., where PAGA representative plaintiffs disavow the “individual” portion of a PAGA claim) are a permissible end...more
Earlier this month, the Court of Appeal and the California Supreme Court provided helpful guidance on whistleblower retaliation cases. The Court of Appeal addressed who is a prevailing party entitled to fee and cost recovery...more
Retaliation Verdict Reversed Where Plaintiff Obtained No Relief - Can an employee prove retaliation at trial yet still recover nothing – not even attorney’s fees? According to a recent decision from the California Court of...more
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
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
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
California Labor Code section 512 guarantees a thirty (30) minute, off-duty, meal period for employees after five (5) work hours, and a second thirty (30) minute, off duty, meal period after ten (10) work hours. Section 512...more
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
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court held that PAGA does not apply to public entity employers....more