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
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
4/2/2025
/ Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
California ,
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) ,
Employment Contract ,
Employment Litigation ,
Federal Arbitration Act ,
Motion to Compel ,
Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) ,
State Labor Laws ,
Viking River Cruises Inc v Moriana
Wildfires continue to rage across Southern California, leveling entire neighborhoods, forcing evacuations for tens of thousands of people, and posing incredible hardship on businesses and their employees...more
1/14/2025
/ Anti-Retaliation Provisions ,
California ,
Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA) ,
Compliance ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Employee Benefits ,
Employees ,
Employment Contract ,
Exempt-Employees ,
Natural Disasters ,
Non-Exempt Employees ,
Paid Leave ,
Pre-Employment Agreements ,
State Labor Laws ,
Wage and Hour ,
Wildfires
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
1/8/2025
/ Appeals ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
California ,
Civil Monetary Penalty ,
Class Action ,
Employee Rights ,
Employment Contract ,
Employment Litigation ,
Independent Contractors ,
Labor Code ,
Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) ,
State Labor Laws ,
Viking River Cruises Inc v Moriana
The California Labor Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) recently refreshed its Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) regarding Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims processing in light of the recent legislative reforms....more
As we previously reported, California recently enacted AB 1076, which reinforces the state’s broad statutory ban on noncompete agreements. The law took effect on January 1, 2024, and expressly codifies Edwards v. Arthur...more
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
On July 17, 2023, approximately one year after the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Viking River Cruises, the California Supreme Court issued its highly-anticipated decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies. The Court...more
7/21/2023
/ Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
California ,
Employees ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) ,
SCOTUS ,
State Labor Laws ,
Viking River Cruises ,
Viking River Cruises Inc v Moriana
Last week, the California Supreme Court unanimously ruled that employers are not liable to nonemployees who contract COVID-19 from employee household members that bring the virus home from their workplace, because “[a]n...more
As we have written here on multiple occasions, the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) disadvantages employers in several ways. Despite permitting recovery similar to what might be obtained in a class action, class...more
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