Archive for Employment Litigation

California Supreme Court to Employers: Ignorance of the Law is Not a Defense

When an employer fails to pay an employee at least the minimum wage for all hours worked, current California law allows the employee to sue the employer and collect the minimum wages owed plus an additional amount known as “liquidated damages” equal to the amount of minimum wages…

U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Heightened Standard for “Reverse Discrimination” Claims

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services that white, heterosexual, and other “majority group” employees are not required to meet a heightened standard in order to prove illegal employment discrimination.  This decision puts majority group plaintiffs on the same legal…

Don’t Rely on AI (or Lawyers Who Rely on AI) for Legal Advice!

A California federal court in Lacey v. State Farm recently issued a dramatic example of the consequences to lawyers and their clients of trusting artificial intelligence.  In what the court described as a “collective debacle,” a large team of high-profile attorneys submitted a brief with faulty – hallucinatory…

California Court Allows Employee to Escape Arbitration of PAGA Claim

In a recent ruling, the California Court of Appeals in Rodriguez v. Packers Sanitation Service, Ltd. allowed an employee who had signed a mandatory employment agreement to avoid having to arbitrate his PAGA claim. The Court’s reasoning was that, by pleading his PAGA claim as a representative claim…

Governor Signs PAGA Reform Bills to Ease Burdens on Employers

California’s Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) deputizes any employee who has experienced a violation of virtually any state employment law to sue to recover penalties arising out of violations he or she experienced – plus penalties arising out of violations committed against every one of his or her…

Court Strikes Down California Anti-Arbitration Statute

The California legislature is notoriously hostile to mandatory arbitration agreements in the employment context.  That’s because the legislature believes employers have more negotiating power than employees; thus, the arbitration agreements that employers give to employees often have one-sided terms that heavily favor the employer.  The employee often feels…

EEOC Updates Workplace Harassment Guidance

Earlier today, for the first time in over 25 years, the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) updated its enforcement guidance on unlawful workplace harassment.   Though not legally binding, this new guidance makes clear how the EEOC will enforce federal anti-harassment laws under the current administration. The…

Think Twice Before Deleting Those Text Messages!

Last week, in Jones vs. Riot Hospitality Group LLC, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of a plaintiff’s employment discrimination suit because the plaintiff was found to have destroyed evidence. During the litigation in the trial court, the employer became concerned that the plaintiff had…

Are “Stay Or Pay” Clauses The New Non-Competes?

Today’s New York Times contains an excellent article on the increasing use of so-called “stay or pay” clauses in employment agreements.  Once an employee signs a contract with a “stay or pay” clause, if that employee quits before X months/years (each contract is different), the employee will have…

Firing Employee for Misconduct and Poor Performance Not Discriminatory, Even if Misconduct Related to Employee’s Religion

Ronald Hittle was the Fire Chief in Stockton, California.  In May 2010, the City received an anonymous letter describing Hittle as a “corrupt, racist, lying, religious fanatic who should not be allowed to continue as the Fire Chief of Stockton.”  It was later revealed that the letter came…