• 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

Employment

February 10, 2012

Court Reverses Class Action Judgment After Trial And Orders The Class Be Decertified

This was a class action alleging claims of misclassification brought under various provisions of the California Labor Code, as well as conversion and unfair competition, claiming that certain business bankers were misclassified.  Defendant U.S. Bank claimed that the employees were properly

Employment,  Litigation

February 6, 2012

Appellate Court Upholds Trial Court’s Ruling That Arbitration Provision Is Unconscionable

In Mayers v. Volt Management Corp, the Court of Appeals ruled that an arbitration agreement was unconscionable.  There, Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against his former employer alleging several claims under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”). The Defendant filed a motion to compel

Alternative Dispute Resolution,  Employment,  Litigation

January 13, 2012

U.S. Supreme Court Protects Religious Organization From Suit By Former Teacher

In Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 132 S. Ct. 694 (2012), the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor a religious organization being sued by a former teacher.  There, a former employee filed a charge with the E.E.O.C. claiming that

Employment,  Litigation

January 7, 2012

Court Upholds Invalidation of Pre-Employment Arbitration Clause

In Wisdom v. AccentCare, Inc. 202 Cal.App.4th 591, (2012), the Court held that an arbitration agreement found in a pre-employment application was both procedurally and substantively unconscionable.  The Court held that the arbitration provision was procedurally unconscionable “because its language

Alternative Dispute Resolution,  Employment,  Litigation

August 28, 2011

Employee Of Independent Contractor Cannot Sue The Company That Hired The Independent Contractor

In SeaBright Insurance Co. v. US Airways, Inc., the California Supreme Court held that an employee of an independent contractor who was injured in the workplace could not sue the party that hired the contractor company to do the work, even when this party failed to comply with workplace safety

Employment,  Litigation

August 28, 2011

No Interference With California Family Rights Act If Employee Does Not Return Within 12 Weeks

In Rogers v. County of Los Angeles, the Court of Appeals held that an employee cannot pursue a claim for interference with her rights under the California Family Rights Act (“CFRA”) if she is out on leave more than 12 weeks. There, the plaintiff, Rogers, worked for the County for 36 years, the

Employment,  Litigation

August 20, 2011

“Me Too” Evidence Permitted In Wrongful Termination Case

In Pantoja v. Anton, the Court was asked to decide whether the trial court erred in not allowing the jury to hear “me too” evidence, that is, evidence of the employer’s alleged gender bias in the form of harassing activity against women employees other than the plaintiff. In particular, the “me too”

Employment,  Litigation

June 27, 2011

Employees May Recover 2 Hours Of Premium Pay Per Day If The Employer Denies Them Both Meal Breaks and Rest Periods

In UPS v. Superior Court (Los Angeles), the California Court of Appeal held that Labor Code section 226.7 permits up to two premium payments per work day.  There, UPS was sued by numerous employees who were seeking compensation for UPS’s alleged failure to provide meal breaks and rest periods

Employment

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 15
  • Page 16
  • Page 17
  • Page 18
  • 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