Litigation

In Soto v. Motel 6 Operating, L.P., the Court of Appeal upheld a trial court’s declaration that Labor Code Section 226(a) does not require employers to include the monetary value of accrued paid vacation time in employee wage statements until the end of an employment relationship. In the event of

In Castro-Ramirez v. Dependable Highway Express, Inc., the Court of Appeal declared that the FEHA prohibits discrimination towards employees with disabilities and employees who have an existing association with a disabled person. The Court held that the FEHA provides broader protections than the

In Young v. REMX, Inc., the Court of Appeal upheld a trial court order compelling arbitration of Plaintiff’s individual claims, dismissing her class claims, bifurcating her representative claim pursuant to the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), and staying the PAGA claim pending

In Mitchell v. Department of Public Health, the Court of Appeal overturned a trial court’s determination that a Plaintiff’s claim for racial discrimination against his former employer should be dismissed by reason of Plaintiff’s failure to file suit within the relevant statute of

In Ramos v. Garcia, Plaintiff prevailed on a number of wage and hour claims against two of his former employers, but failed to prevail against a third defendant, whom the trial court deemed to be a manager and co-employee, not an employer. The trial court awarded attorneys’ fees to the third

In Harris v. TAP Worldwide, LLC, the validity of an arbitration agreement appended to an employee handbook was at issue. Plaintiff received an employee handbook that conspicuously referenced an attached appendix dealing with the company’s arbitration policies, as well as a separate “Agreement to

In Moore v. Regents of the University of California, a former employee filed multiple causes of action under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) against her former employer, including disability discrimination, failure to accommodate, failure to engage in the interactive process,

In United Educators of San Francisco v. California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, the Court interpreted the language of section 1253.3 of the California Unemployment Insurance Code. In accordance with the intent of the legislature, the Court determined that school employees who have received