News & Analysis as of

State Labor Laws › Employment Litigation › Putative Class Actions

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Good Faith Defense Applies To Wage Statement Penalty Claims

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

The California Supreme Court concluded that the “good faith” defense applies to claims seeking to impose penalties under California Labor Code section 226. An employee must show that an employer’s failure to comply with...more

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

Sixth Circuit Asked to Resolve District Court Split on Ohio Class and Collective Action Rules

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

On January 3, 2024, the defendant in Heppard v. Dunham’s Athleisure Corporation filed an interlocutory appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, arguing that the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District...more

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

Washington Employers Beware - Barrage of Suits Filed Over Pay Range Disclosure Law

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

Employers in Washington are facing a flurry of class actions alleging violations of the state’s new pay transparency law. While it is too early to gauge the viability of the claims, employers doing business in Washington may...more

Stokes Wagner

Rounding Time Entries - Just Don’t Do It

Stokes Wagner on

On October 24, 2022, the Sixth District issued a decision in in Camp v. Home Depot, handing employees a major win in the wage and hour arena by holding that Home Depot’s practice of rounding hourly employees’ total daily...more

BakerHostetler

Dead End for Class Certification? Ninth Circuit Provides Roadmap for Defending Independent Contractor Misclassification Class...

BakerHostetler on

For businesses using independent contractor vendors, misclassification claims are usually well-suited for class certification. A plaintiff’s path toward certifying a class can be relatively smooth when all vendors of a...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Meal, Rest Break Violations Trigger Additional Penalties in California

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP on

Employers that fail to provide premium pay for missed meal and rest periods in California face additional monetary penalties under the state’s Labor Code, according to a unanimous decision from the California Supreme Court. ...more

Stokes Wagner

California Supreme Court Holds Premium Pay for Missed Breaks Constitutes “Wages” That Must Be Reported on Wage Statements and Paid...

Stokes Wagner on

On May 23, 2022, in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., the California Supreme Court clarified that a violation of Labor Code section 226.7 (payment of premium wages for meal and rest period violations) gives rise to...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

Volunteers May Work For Nonprofits Without Compensation

Proskauer - California Employment Law on

The California Court of Appeal has definitively resolved an issue that was until now somewhat ambiguous: Can volunteers in fact volunteer their time for nonprofit organizations without receiving pay or other forms of...more

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

California Supreme Court to Review Meal and Rest Period Premium Calculation Case

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

The Supreme Court of California recently agreed to review the California Court of Appeal’s decision in Ferra v. Loews Hollywood Hotel, LLC, 40 Cal. App. 5th 1239 (2019), as limited to the following question: Did the...more

Carlton Fields

Ninth Circuit Dismisses Interlocutory Appeal, Finds Order Compelling Arbitration Not a “Final Decision” Under FAA

Carlton Fields on

The plaintiff filed a putative class action for alleged violations of California employment law, and the defendant moved to compel arbitration....more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Complicating Simplicity: Ninth Circuit Requires Separate Stand-Alone Documents for Employment Background Checks

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

Albert Einstein believed “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” The Ninth Circuit seems to agree. In Gilberg v. Cal. Check Cashing Stores, LLC, No. 17-16263, 2019 WL 347027 (Ninth Cir. Jan. 29,...more

11 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide