Cassady v. Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, 145 Cal. App. 4th 220 (2006)
Ralph Cassady was employed as “of counsel” to Morgan Lewis for a 13-month period, during which time he performed legal services for a longtime client of his, Rallie P. Rallis. Years later, Rallis sued Cassady, Morgan Lewis, and other firms and attorneys with whom Cassady had been affiliated for a variety
Valdez v. Himmelfarb, 144 Cal. App. 4th 1261 (2006)
Elias Valdez alleged that he was injured in the course of his employment as a cook, janitor, dishwasher, and gardener at defendants’ Malibu restaurant. Valdez sued for personal injury, unfair competition, and declaratory relief based on defendants’ failure to carry workers’ compensation insurance as required by statute, but defendants contended that Valdez’s claims were barred
Delfino v. Agilent Technologies, Inc., 2006 WL 3635399 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 14, 2006)
Michelangelo Delfino and Mary E. Day sued Agilent Technologies after a series of threatening e-mails and Yahoo! Message Board postings about them were created by one of Agilent’s former employees (who used the pseudonym “crack_smoking_jesus”). Agilent moved for summary judgment pursuant to the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA), which
Bates v. United Parcel Serv., 465 F.3d 1069 (9th Cir. 2006)
One of the requirements applied by UPS to those applicants seeking to drive the familiar brown “package cars” was that they pass the physical examination (including a hearing exam) that the DOT requires of drivers of commercial vehicles of a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of at least 10,001 pounds. (UPS’s vehicles had
Taylor v. City of Los Angeles, 144 Cal. App. 4th 1216 (2006)
Eric Taylor, an electrical engineer employed by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, alleged that he suffered from multiple acts of retaliation by his supervisor (Bruce Hamer) after Taylor acted as a “supporting and material witness” on behalf of a former subordinate (Donald Coleman) in Coleman’s claim that he had
Alvarez v. May Dep’t Stores Co., 143 Cal. App. 4th 1223 (2006)
Plaintiffs in this case are 56 current and former Area Sales Managers employed by May Department Stores who alleged that they were improperly classified as exempt administrative employees and that they were not paid statutory overtime that was owed to them. The trial court sustained without leave to amend May’s demurrer based
Church v. Jamison, 143 Cal. App. 4th 1568 (2006)
In this action arising from the alleged malpractice of John Church’s attorney, the trial court granted the attorney’s motion for judgment on the pleadings on the ground that the attorney could not be held liable for legal malpractice because the statute of limitations had not run on Church’s claim for unpaid vacation at the time
Roby v. McKesson HBOC, 2006 WL 3775897 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 26, 2006)
After doing a “stellar” job for 25 years and working as a customer service support liaison for McKesson, Charlene Roby developed a panic disorder and began missing substantial amounts of time from work. McKesson fired Roby for abusing its attendance policy, though many of her absences were attributable to her mental
In re Farmers Ins. Exch., 466 F.3d 853 (9th Cir. 2006)
In this class action case, more than 2,000 current and former insurance claims adjusters sought overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), alleging that Farmers had improperly classified them as exempt administrative employees. The Ninth Circuit applied a regulation issued by the United States Department of Labor (29 C.F.R. § 541.203),
Dore v. Arnold Worldwide, Inc., 39 Cal. 4th 384 (2006)
Brook Dore, who was employed as a management supervisor, countersigned an employment agreement (in the form of a letter) that characterized his employment as “at-will,” which was defined as the right of either party to terminate the employment “at any time.” Although the trial court granted the employer’s motion for summary judgment, the court