California Labor Code

Subscribe to California Labor Code via RSS

Co-authored by Steve Shardonofsky and Maya Harel

In opposing class- or collective-action certification, employers often submit declarations from current employees stating that they have been paid properly and have not been subject to whatever unlawful policy or practice is at issue.  There is an increasing trend in courts across the country to reject these type of declarations on the basis…
Continue Reading When Is A Footnote Not Just A Footnote? When It Helps Level The Playing Field For Employers in Class- And Collective-Action Certification Battles…

Authored by Gena Usenheimer

In a decision that is becoming more and more commonplace, last week the Central District of California enforced a class action waiver in an arbitration agreement, rejecting the panoply of arguments raised by the plaintiff in opposition.

In Appelbaum v. AutoNation, Inc., et al., the plaintiff sought to representative a putative class of service technicians and…
Continue Reading Another One Bites the Dust: Central District of California Joins the Chorus of Courts Enforcing Class Action Waivers

Co-authored by Rishi Puri, Noah Finkel, and Andrew Paley

At this point, California employers are all too familiar with litigation seeking compensation for preliminary and postliminary activities.  The de minimis doctrine is a main line of defense in actions for these claims.  Recognized in the seminal U.S. Supreme Court decision of Anderson v. Mt Clemens Pottery Co.,…
Continue Reading Starbucks Ruling Makes the Most of the De Minimis Doctrine

Authored by Kyle Petersen

What happens if plaintiffs break their promise to present evidence that their claims can be decided on a classwide basis at trial?  In Dilts v. Penske Logistics, LLC, the Plaintiffs found out this harsh lesson when the Court decertified the case mid-trial because Plaintiffs failed to present classwide proof of their claims.  This decision out…
Continue Reading Court Makes A U-Turn and Decertifies Class At Trial

California%20Court%20of%20Appeals%20Seal2.pngCo-Authored by Tripper Ortman and Robb McFadden

Insurance agents and other types of salespeople with the discretion to determine when, how, and whether to sell a company’s products may properly be classified as independent contractors, according to the California Court of Appeal’s recent holding in Arnold v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance Company — the first California decision to detail the…

Continue Reading California Court Of Appeal Provides Roadmap On The Proper Classification Of Independent Contractor

Authored by Laura Reathaford

On January 20, 2011, the District Court for the Southern District of California granted Home Depot’s motion to dismiss a putative class action involving plaintiff’s claim for penalties associated with Home Depot’s purported failure to include earned vacation hours on employee itemized wage statements.  Plaintiff’s complaint alleged that California Labor Code Section 226(a), which requires an…

Continue Reading Court Rules that California Labor Code Section 226(a) Does Not Require Employers To Itemize Earned Vacation Hours On Wage Statements