On May 19, 2025, Proskauer attorneys successfully compelled to arbitration an employment discrimination lawsuit that had been filed in the Los Angeles Superior Court. While the former employee claimed that she never signed the arbitration agreement because she lacked access to her work email while on medical leave, the defendants established with emails showing that the employee actually did “access the . . . platform”
Williams v. Alacrity Solutions Grp., LLC, 110 Cal. App. 5th 932 (2025)
Corbin Williams sued his former employer (Alacrity Solutions Group, LLC) for various wage and hour violations. However, Williams failed to provide written notice of his claims to the state Labor & Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) until more than a year had passed since the end of his employment with Alacrity, thus barring any
Bradsbery v. Vicar Operating, Inc., 110 Cal. App. 5th 899 (2025)
La Kimba Bradsbery and Cheri Brakensiek sued their former employer (Vicar Operating, Inc.) in a putative class action, alleging that Vicar had failed to provide them with meal periods for shifts between five and six hours. Vicar responded that plaintiffs had prospectively waived in writing all waivable meal periods throughout their employment with Vicar.
Tesla Motors, Inc. v. Balan, 134 F.4th 558 (9th Cir. 2025)
Tesla Motors and Elon Musk prevailed in an arbitration proceeding against a former employee based on California’s one-year statute of limitations. Tesla and Musk subsequently petitioned the United States District Court for the Northern District of California to confirm the arbitration award in their favor. The district court granted the petition to confirm, but
Hofer v. Boladian, 2025 WL 1354795 (Cal. Ct. App. 2025)
Plaintiffs in this case initiated litigation against defendants, notwithstanding the existence of binding arbitration agreements between the parties. For six months following the filing of the litigation, plaintiffs sought two forms of preliminary injunctive relief, opposed a demurrer, propounded more than 700 discovery requests, demanded a jury trial in their case management conference statement, represented
Nazaryan v. FemtoMetrix, Inc., 2025 WL 1177060 (Cal. Ct. App. 2025)
Hovik Nazaryan sued his former employer and several of its officers and a member of the board of directors after the parties settled a prior dispute between them and the defendants agreed to classify the settlement proceeds as “Founder’s Stock” and not “compensation, salary or income for [Nazaryan’s] services to FemtoMetrix.” The defendants subsequently
De la Cruz v. Mission Hills Shopping Ctr. LLC, 2025 WL 1218040 (Cal. Ct. App. 2025)
Myranda De la Cruz tripped on a pothole in a Mission Hills shopping center parking lot. There was an exculpatory clause in a contract between De la Cruz’s employer (a tenant in the shopping center) and the shopping center that relieved the shopping center of any liability for negligent
Odom v. Los Angeles Cmty. Coll. Dist., 110 Cal. App. 5th 470 (2025)
Sabrena Odom, a tenured Los Angeles Community College (“LACC”) professor, sued LACC and one of its top administrators for sexual harassment and retaliation. After a three-week trial, the jury awarded plaintiff a total of $10 million for past and future mental suffering and emotional distress damages. The Court of Appeal reversed, finding
Sexton v. Apple Studios LLC, 110 Cal. App. 5th 183 (2025)
In early 2022, Apple Studios LLC conditionally offered actor Brent Sexton the role of U.S. President Andrew Johnson in its production of “Manhunt,” a limited streaming series about the hunt for John Wilkes Booth following the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. One of the conditions for Sexton’s casting was that he be fully vaccinated in compliance