We invite you to review our newly-posted July 2020 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:

We invite you to review our newly-posted March 2019 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:

We invite you to review our newly-posted January 2019 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:

Biel v. St. James School, 2018 WL 6597221 (9th Cir. 2018)

Kristen Biel was fired from her fifth grade teaching position at St. James Catholic School after she told the school that she had breast cancer and would need to miss work to undergo chemotherapy. Following her termination, Biel alleged that the school had violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). The district

City of San Diego v. Superior Court, 2018 WL 6629322 (Cal. Ct. App. 2018)

As part of an internal affairs investigation regarding the unauthorized disclosure of a confidential police report, the San Diego Police Department questioned detective Dana Hoover regarding communications she had had with an attorney who was representing her in an employment-related lawsuit against the city. Although Hoover invoked the attorney-client privilege,

Huerta v. Kava Holdings, Inc., 29 Cal. App. 5th 74 (2018)

Felix Huerta sued Kava Holdings dba Hotel Bel-Air after the hotel terminated him and another restaurant server who was involved in an altercation during work. The trial court granted Kava’s motion for nonsuit as to Huerta’s claim for retaliation under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), and the jury returned a

Moreno v. Visser Ranch, Inc., 2018 WL 6696021 (Cal. Ct. App. 2018)

Ray David Moreno, a passenger riding in a truck that his father (Ernesto Moreno) was driving, was injured when the truck left the roadway, hit an embankment and rolled over. Ray sued his father, the corporation that employed his father and an affiliated corporation that owned the vehicle. The employer required Ernesto

Donohue v. AMN Servs., LLC, 2018 WL 6445360 (Cal. Ct. App. 2018)

AMN used a computer-based timekeeping system for all nonexempt employees, including plaintiffs/nurse recruiters. The timekeeping system rounded recruiters’ punch times (both punch in and punch out) to the nearest 10-minute increment. To establish the proper hourly compensation, AMN converted each 10-minute increment to a decimal (to the nearest hundredth of a minute),

Gerard v. Orange Coast Mem. Med. Ctr., 2018 WL 6442036 (Cal. S. Ct. 2018)

Plaintiff health care workers formerly employed by Orange Coast Memorial Medical Center alleged that they usually worked shifts of 12 hours or more. A hospital policy allowed employees who worked shifts longer than 10 hours to voluntarily waive one of their two meal periods, even if their shifts lasted more

Hernandez v. Pacific Bell Tel. Co., 29 Cal. App. 5th 131 (2018)

Employees of Pacific Bell who install and repair video and internet services in customers’ homes asserted a putative class action against the company for allegedly unpaid compensation for time they spent traveling in an employer-provided vehicle (loaded with equipment and tools) between their homes and a customer’s residence under an optional