• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
Wagner Legal Group, P.C.

Wagner Legal Group, P.C.

  • ABOUT
    • ATTORNEYS
      • MARK H. WAGNER
      • OUTSIDE CO-COUNSEL
    • AREAS WE SERVE
    • ARTICLES
    • RESOURCES
    • RESULTS
    • CLIENT REVIEWS
    • VIDEOS
  • EMPLOYMENT
    • DISCRIMINATION
      • AGE DISCRIMINATION
      • DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
      • GENDER/SEX DISCRIMINATION
      • PREGNANCY DISCRIMINATION
      • RACE/NATIONAL ORIGIN DISCRIMINATION
      • RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION
    • EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENTS AND SEVERANCE REVIEW
    • HARASSMENT/HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT
    • NON-COMPETE AGREEMENTS
    • RETALIATION/
      WHISTLEBLOWER
    • SEXUAL HARASSMENT
    • UNEMPLOYMENT
    • WAGE/HOUR
    • WRONGFUL TERMINATION
  • OTHER PRACTICE AREAS
    • BUSINESS LITIGATION/BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS
    • PERSONAL INJURY
  • BLOG
  • CONTACT US

Mark H. Wagner

August 15, 2015

California’s Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act (ICRAA) Is Constitutional

In Connor v. First Student, Inc., the Court of Appeal held that the California’s Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act (ICRAA) is not unconstitutionally vague. The ICRAA and the Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act (CCRAA) regulate agencies that gather information on consumers to provide

Business Litigation,  Litigation

August 5, 2015

California Supreme Court Upholds Arbitration Clause In Consumer Contract in Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co.

In Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co., the California Supreme Court addressed the enforceability of arbitration provisions with class action waivers in consumer agreements, in particular, a sale contract used by car dealerships.  The trial court initially ruled the contract provision as unenforceable

Alternative Dispute Resolution,  Business Litigation

July 21, 2015

California Supreme Court Clarifies Methods Of Proof In Class Action Cases

In Duran v. US Bank, N.A, the California Supreme Court clarified the methods of proof permitted in class action cases. There, loan officers for the bank sued for overtime, claiming they were misclassified as exempt employees under the outside salesperson exemption. The case went to trial. The trial

Business Transactions,  Litigation

June 30, 2015

“Death Knell” Doctrine Does Not Apply When PAGA Claim Remains In Trial Court

In Munoz v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., Court held that the “death knell” doctrine did not apply and a claim was not appealable. Under California law, an order denying a motion to certify all class claims leaving only the named plaintiff’s individual claims in the trial court is an appealable

Employment,  Litigation

June 26, 2015

Employer Should Withhold Payroll Taxes When Paying Judgment After Lawsuit

In Cifuentes v. Costco Wholesale Corporation, Cifuentes won a judgment for lost wages against his former employer, Costco. Costco withheld federal and state payroll taxes from the award when paying it. Cifuentes claimed the judgment was not satisfied, citing the decision in Lisec v. United Airlines,

Employment,  Litigation

May 28, 2015

Court Rejects Forum Selection and Choice Of Law Clauses In Employment Contract, Ruling For California Employee

In Verdugo v. Alliantgroup, L.P., the Court rejected a forum selection clause and choice of law clause in an employment contract. There the plaintiff filed an action in California. The company filed a motion to stay based on a forum selection clause in her employment agreement. The clause designated

Employment,  Litigation

January 9, 2015

Security Guards Are Entitled To Compensation For All “On-Call” Time

In Mendiola v. CPS Security Solutions, Inc., the California Supreme Court held that on-call security guards employed to provide security, who were required to spend time on active patrol and then spend night hours on call at the worksite and to respond to issues, if necessary, were entitled to

Employment,  Litigation

September 16, 2014

Parent Corporations May Be Liable For Acts of Employees Of Its Subsidiary

In Castaneda v. The Ensign Group, Inc., the Court held that where a corporation with no employees, owned a corporation with employees, and defendant with no employees exercised some control over the corporation with employees, triable issues of fact existed as to whether defendant was the employer

Litigation

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 11
  • Page 12
  • Page 13
  • Page 14
  • Page 15
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 20
  • Go to Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

(310) 857-5293

Free Consultation

SCHEDULE

Practice Areas

  • EMPLOYMENT
    • DISCRIMINATION
      • AGE DISCRIMINATION
      • DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
      • Gender/Sex Discrimination
      • Pregnancy Discrimination
      • Race/National Origin Discrimination
      • Religious Discrimination
    • EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENTS AND SEVERANCE REVIEW
    • HARASSMENT/HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT
    • NON-COMPETE AGREEMENTS
    • RETALIATION/WHISTLEBLOWER
    • SEXUAL HARASSMENT
    • UNEMPLOYMENT
    • WAGE/HOUR
    • WRONGFUL TERMINATION
  • OTHER PRACTICE AREAS
    • BUSINESS LITIGATION/BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS
    • PERSONAL INJURY

ARRANGE A FREE CONSULTATION

consult

Footer

  • HOME
  • ABOUT
  • EMPLOYMENT LAW
  • OTHER PRACTICE AREAS
  • BLOG
  • CONTACT
(310) 857-5293

2601 Ocean Park Blvd, Suite 208, Santa Monica, CA 90405

Wagner Legal Group P.C.

Copyright © 2025 · Business Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

© 2023 WAGNER LEGAL GROUP, P.C. | Legal Disclaimer ● Privacy Policy ● Sitemap