As we previously reported, California recently enacted AB 1076, which reinforces the state’s broad statutory ban on noncompete agreements. The law took effect on January 1, 2024, and expressly codifies Edwards v. Arthur Andersen LLP, 44 Cal. 4th 937 (2008), a California Supreme Court opinion barring any noncompete, no matter how narrowly tailored it may be. The new law also affirms
The California Supreme Court has issued its much-anticipated decision in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., determining whether Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims can be dismissed as unmanageable. The Court affirmed a lower court’s decision, holding that “trial courts lack inherent authority to strike PAGA claims on manageability grounds”—that is, trial courts may not “dismiss [them] with prejudice.” Slip op. at 1-2. In
As we wrote previously, last summer’s blockbuster decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., 14 Cal. 5th 1104 (2023) contained a notable silver lining. In ruling that a Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) plaintiff’s “non-individual” claims survive in court even after the “individual” claims are compelled to arbitration, the California Supreme Court strongly suggested that the non-individual claims should be stayed until the
In Arias v. Superior Court, 46 Cal. 4th 969 (2009), the California Supreme Court ruled that Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) actions need not satisfy class action requirements, and in the fourteen years since, PAGA plaintiffs have routinely (and often successfully) resisted attempts to apply class action principles to PAGA actions. A recent unpublished California Court of Appeal decision bucks that trend by lending
On November 8, 2023, the California Supreme Court heard oral argument in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., a case that could have profound implications for the future of Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) litigation. The Court granted review in order to decide whether courts have the power to strike or limit PAGA claims that would prove to be unmanageable at trial.
A prior
In what has become an annual tradition, California – that fabled workers’ paradise on earth – has enacted a slew of new laws that, come January, may keep even the most hearty HR professionals up at night.
As we reported earlier this year (here), the California Chamber of Commerce initially identified 11 “Job Killer Bills” that were introduced early in the legislative session, but
A two-year standoff between the fast food industry and labor unions ended this week as stakeholders announced a deal that will increase the minimum wage to $20 for California workers at fast food chains with more than 60 locations nationwide.
As we previously reported, in September 2022, California passed A.B. 257, which created a 10-member fast-food council with authority to set wage, hour, and
As readers may know, the Los Angeles Freelance Worker Protections Ordinance took effect on July 1, 2023. The new law imposes additional requirements on businesses in the City of Los Angeles who have contracts with freelance workers.
With Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. in the books, it is now clear that Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) plaintiffs do not lose standing to pursue representative claims in court when their individual PAGA claims are sent to arbitration. In Adolph’s wake, disputes may arise regarding whether the representative court action should be stayed pending the individual arbitration. Adolph strongly suggested a stay is
On July 17, 2023, approximately one year after the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Viking River Cruises, the California Supreme Court issued its highly-anticipated decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies. The Court answered the critical question of whether a Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) plaintiff retains their standing to pursue non-individual claims after their individual claims are compelled to arbitration. As many