Arce v. Ensign Grp., Inc., 96 Cal. App. 5th 622 (2023)

Cecilia Arce worked as a certified nursing assistant at a skilled nursing facility. After her employer terminated her, she brought claims under the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) that she worked through meal and rest periods and was not paid premiums she was owed for meal and rest breaks after her termination. The

Kuciemba v. Victory Woodworks, Inc., 14 Cal. 5th 993 (2023); 74 F.4th 1039 (9th Cir. 2023)

The California Supreme Court unanimously ruled that employers are not liable to nonemployees who contract COVID-19 from employee household members who bring the virus home from their workplace, because “[a]n employer does not owe a duty of care under California law to prevent the spread of COVID-19 to

Hittle v. City of Stockton, 76 F.4th 877 (9th Cir. 2023)

Ronald Hittle served as the City’s Fire Chief before he was fired (following an investigation by an outside investigator) because he lacked effectiveness and judgment in his ongoing leadership of the Fire Department; used City time and a City vehicle to attend a religious event and approved on-duty attendance of other Fire Department

Groff v. DeJoy, 600 U.S. ___, 143 S. Ct. 2279 (2023)

Gerald Groff, an Evangelical Christian, took a mail delivery job with the USPS at a time when postal service employees were was not required to work on Sundays.  However, when the USPS began facilitating Sunday deliveries for Amazon, he was called upon to work Sundays, which ultimately resulted in his resignation from his

LaCour v. Marshalls of Cal., LLC, 2023 WL 5543622 (Cal. Ct. App. 2023)

Plaintiff Robert LaCour, a former “loss prevention specialist” for Marshalls, appealed from a judgment in favor of his former employer and certain affiliated entities.  Marshalls filed a demurrer arguing that because LaCour’s employment with Marshalls ended in May 2019, he had only a year and 65 days to bring a PAGA

We invite you to review our newly-posted September 2023 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 October 2022 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:

Musgrove v. Silver, 82 Cal. App. 5th 694 (2022)

As part of an entourage of family and friends, a Hollywood producer (Joel Silver) brought his executive assistant (who was employed through Silver’s company) as well as a French chef Silver personally employed to a luxurious resort in Bora Bora, French Polynesia to attend the August 2015 wedding of actress Jennifer Aniston.  Tragically, the executive

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:

Barriga v. 99 Cents Only Stores LLC, 2020 WL 3481717 (Cal. Ct. App. 2020)

Sofia Wilton Barriga filed this lawsuit against her employer, 99 Cents Only, alleging that the “zero-tolerance” policy requiring its stores to lock their doors at closing time forced nonexempt employees such as herself and those similarly situated to wait for as long as 15 minutes for a manager with a