Navigating Civil Standing Requirements for Defense Success — RICO Report Podcast
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Universal Injunctions, Associational Standing, and Forum Shopping - Their Effects on Legal Challenges to Regulations
Recent Trends in Article III Standing - The Consumer Finance Podcast
Eleventh Circuit Grants en banc Review to Resolve Controversial TCPA Standing Ruling
AGG Talks: Background Screening - A Refresher on Responding to Consumer File Requests under Section 609 of the FCRA
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 313: Listen and Learn -- The Basics of Justiciability (Con Law)
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS in Review, Biden Acts to Limit Non-Competes, NY HERO Act Model Safety Plans - Employment Law This Week®
SCOTUS Watch: The ACA and Key Health Law Areas Justice Barrett Could Impact - Diagnosing Health Care Podcast
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 110: Listen and Learn -- The Basics of Justiciability (Con Law)
Let's Talk Child Custody
Podcast: Texas v. United States of America
Supreme Court’s Rulings On Same-Sex Marriage Spark Many Questions On Employee Benefits
DynCorp's 'Strategic' Defense In Drug Crop Spraying Suit
Bill on Bankruptcy: MF Global Creditors Undeterred by Low Value
Same-Sex Marriage Cases in 90 Seconds
In a long-awaited decision, the California Supreme Court resolved a split in appellate authority in Turrieta v. Lyft, Inc., holding that a plaintiff who files a claim under the state's Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA)...more
On August 1, 2024, in Turrieta v. Lyft et al., the California Supreme Court held that a plaintiff in a Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) action does not have a right to intervene -- or to object to or vacate a judgment...more
On February 12, 2024, in Johnson v. Lowe’s Home Centers, LLC, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that an employee’s non-arbitrable, representative PAGA claims are not subject to dismissal when the plaintiff is ordered to...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, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., finally clarifying the question of what constitutes standing under California's Private Attorneys General Act...more
Following the United States Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Moriana v. Viking River Cruises, California courts were tasked with the open question of whether an “aggrieved” employee whose individual Private Attorneys...more
Recently, in Adolph v. Uber Tech., Inc., the California Supreme Court held that plaintiffs who proceed to arbitration on individual labor code claims do not lose standing to bring representative claims in court under the...more
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
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
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. With this decision California employers need to understand that plaintiffs do not lose standing when individual...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court issued its long-anticipated decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. and held that an employee who has been compelled to arbitrate “individual” claims under the California...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
In a highly anticipated ruling, the California Supreme Court has held that employees may still have standing to sue for Labor Code violations in a representative capacity, even when their individual claims have been compelled...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
As we predicted (here), employees can be compelled to individually arbitrate their Labor Code claims under the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”), but an arbitration agreement that prohibits employees from...more
In a significant blow to employment-related arbitration agreements, the California Supreme Court ruled in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. that an employee has standing to bring non-individual, representative California...more
The California Supreme Court has issued its highly anticipated decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., concluding that plaintiffs who must arbitrate their “individual” PAGA claims are not deprived of standing to pursue...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
Under California's Private Attorneys General Act, does an aggrieved employee — who has been compelled to arbitrate their individual claims under PAGA and the California Labor Code — maintain statutory standing to pursue PAGA...more
Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana, employers have been implementing and enforcing arbitration agreements requiring employees to arbitrate their individual Private Attorneys’ General...more