Litigation

In Gerard v. Orange Coast Memorial Medical Center, the Court stated thata wage order of the Industrial Welfare Commission (“IWC”) permitting health care employees to waive their second meal period break if they work shifts longer than 12 hours did not violate the Labor Code. The Court noted that

In Biel v. St. James School, the Court stated that the First Amendment's ministerial exception to generally applicable employment laws did not bar a teacher’s claim against the Catholic elementary school that terminated her employment. The Court noted that factors to consider in whether an employee

In Huerta v. Kava Holdings, the Court held that Code of Civil Procedure Sec. 998 does not apply to non-frivolous Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) litigation that predates the application of the amended version of Government Code Sec. 12965(b). Defendant terminated two restaurant servers

In Garcia v. Border Transportation Group, LLC, the Court ruled that the California Supreme Court’s Dynamex “suffer or permit to work” standard for determining whether a worker is properly considered an employee or an independent contractor applies to wage order claims, and the Borello standard

In Camacho v. Target Corporation, the Court addressed a workers’ compensation waiver and whether it constituted a general waiver.  The plaintiff filed a lawsuit for discrimination based on sexual orientation, harassment causing a hostile work environment, failure to prevent harassment and

In Diaz v. Grill Concepts Services, Inc. the Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court decision finding an employer liable for waiting time penalties. Here, defendant employer was required to pay its employees a living wage subject to an ordinance promulgated by the Los Angeles City Council. When the

In Huff v. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc., the Court of Appeals agreed with the lower court’s interpretation of the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) in holding that a person personally affected by at least one Labor Code violation committed by an employer – an “aggrieved employee” – may

In Raines v. Coastal Pacific Food Distributors, the Court of Appeal affirmed in part, and reversed in part, a decision by the trial court granting Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on claims brought by Plaintiff under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), in both a representative and