News & Analysis as of

Viking River Cruises Inc v Moriana Civil Monetary Penalty

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

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Fording Viking River, Another California Court of Appeal Holds That PAGA Plaintiffs Maintain Standing to Pursue “Representative”...

California’s Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”) allows employees to act as an “agent” of the State of California and recover civil penalties for violations of the Labor Code through a civil action filed on behalf...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

Ninth Circuit Panel Changes its Mind and Obliterates California’s Anti-Mandatory Employment Arbitration Law

Yesterday, a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel revisited its own 2021 order and finally struck down California’s anti-mandatory employment arbitration law, Assembly Bill 51 (“AB 51”).  In an opinion drafted by the former...more

Buchalter

California’s AB 51, Which Sought to Ban Mandatory Arbitration Agreements, Is Preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act

Buchalter on

Once again, California employers can require workers to sign arbitration agreements as a condition of employment. Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana and in a reversal of its...more

4 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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide