Free Consultation

» Case News

The Supreme Court Of The United States Hands Defendants A Setback In Their Removal Quests: Third-Party Defendants Asserting Counterclaims Cannot Remove Counterclaims To Federal Court. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., v. Jackson, 2019 WL 2257158 (U.S. May 28, 2019)

SUMMARY:

The Supreme Court of the United States held that the general removal statute, 28 U.S.C. §1441, and the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (“CAFA”), 28 U.S.C §1453, does not allow third-party counterclaim def… Read More

Read More

Second District Court of Appeal’s Decision in Ward v. Tilly’s Inc., 31 Cal. App. 5th 1167 (February 4, 2019), Defines “Report For Work” Within Wage Order 7 and Extends The Reporting Time Pay Requirement’s Reach To “Call-In” Shifts For Mercantile Workers

SUMMARY:

The California Second District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court’s decision in favor of the employer which held that an employee must physically appear at the workplace to “report to work.” The Court i… Read More

Read More

Legislative Update

Assembly Member Gonzalez Fletcher sponsored AB 3080, that was co-sponsored by the AFL-CIO and the Screen Actors Guild, which prohibits employers from requiring, as a condition of employment, employees to waive any “right, forum, or procedure” for… Read More
Read More

PAGA STANDING CLARIFIED

In Huff v. Securitas Services USA, Inc., 2018 Cal. App. LEXIS 474 (decided May 23, 2018), the Court of Appeal held that an employee bringing a claim pursuant to the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“the PAGA”) need only… Read More

Read More
Categories: Case News

EMPLOYERS WIN AGAIN - The United States Supreme Court Holds That Employers May Require Employees, As A Condition Of Employment, To Forego Their Right To Collective Action

Continuing to spin the “choice” fiction, in Epic Sys. Corp. v. Lewis, 2018 U.S. LEXIS 3086 (May 18, 2018), the United States Supreme Court further insulates employers from collective or class ac… Read More

Read More

The California Supreme Court Addresses The “Employee” vs. “Independent Contractor” Question in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, 2018 WL 1999120, 2018 Cal. LEXIS 3152 (April 30, 2018)

ISSUE:

The California Wage Orders impose obligations on employers related to minimum wage, maximum hours, and minimum requirements for rest breaks, meal breaks, split shifts worked, and other employment conditions.  The purpose of the Wa… Read More

Read More

For More Information

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.