The U.S. Supreme Court has had to intervene on numerous occasions to save arbitration in the state of California – arbitration is once again under attack in the Golden State.
Authored by partner, Tony Oncidi and senior counsel, Phil Lebel we invite you to read the full article here, originally published in the Daily Journal.
The Empire Struck Back last week when the California Court of Appeal held that the state’s latest back-door attempt to outlaw employment arbitration by any means necessary is preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). Hernandez v. Sohnen Enterprises, Inc., 2024 WL 2313710 (Cal. Ct. App. 2024). As indicated in our earlier post on this topic, it was just a matter of time before
A recent unpublished California Court of Appeal decision, Hegemier v. A Better Life Recovery LLC, Cal. Ct. App., 4th Dist., No. G061892, demonstrates the potential consequence of drafting an arbitration agreement without foreseeing every way a future plaintiff might attempt to pick it apart.
Almost two years ago, in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 596 U.S. 639 (2022),the United States Supreme
We invite you to review our newly-posted March 2024 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:
Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, 318 Cal. Rptr. 3d 475 (Cal. Ct. App. 2024)
For the seventh time since they became effective in 2020, the California Court of Appeal has published an opinion holding that Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §§ 1281.97 and 1281.98 truly mean what they say: “[I]f the [arbitration] fees or costs… are not paid [by the employer] within 30 days after the
Kader v. Southern Cal. Med. Ctr., Inc., 99 Cal. App. 5th 214 (2024)
The Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (9 U.S.C. §§ 401, et seq.) became effective on March 3, 2022. A “statutory note” to the Act states that the “Act shall apply with respect to any dispute or claim that arises or accrues on or after the
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
The Los Angeles Superior Court has bestowed some remarkable gifts upon plaintiffs this holiday season. Two juries have issued gigantic verdicts in favor of individual plaintiffs in separate employment lawsuits within the past month.
On November 16, 2023, in Sosa v. Comerica Bank, a jury delivered a verdict of $14.17 million consisting of $1.17 million in lost earnings (past and future) and $13 million in emotional
We invite you to review our newly-posted November 2023 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:
An anonymous employee sued her former employer and former manager, alleging multiple instances of sexual harassment and assault. The former employer successfully compelled the case to arbitration. The deadline for the employer to pay the arbitration fees pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1281.98(a)(1) was October 3, 2022, but the arbitrator did not