On June 27, 2024, by near-unanimous vote, the California Legislature passed two bills enacting much-needed reform to the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA). We previously reported on the legislative compromise last week, when the deal was first announced.
The most profound changes are contained in AB 2288, which amended Labor Code § 2699—the beating heart of PAGA. AB 2288 makes several significant changes to the
Inspired by a push to repeal the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) by ballot measure (which we previously covered here and here), and at the urging of Governor Gavin Newsom, stakeholders have reached an agreement in principle to reform PAGA and avoid a high-stakes showdown come November. If the Legislature passes the compromise into law by June 27, the measure will be pulled from
Balderas v. Fresh Start Harvesting, Inc., 101 Cal. App. 5th 533 (2024)
Lizbeth Balderas sued her former employer on behalf of 500 other current and former employees of an agricultural company, seeking civil penalties under the California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”). In her complaint, Balderas stated she was “not suing in her individual capacity; she is proceeding herein solely under
Semprini v. Wedbush Secs. Inc., 101 Cal. App. 5th 518 (2024)
Joseph Semprini originally filed a lawsuit against his employer in 2015, which included individual claims, class action claims and a cause of action under the California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”). Soon after this, Semprini and the employer entered into a stipulation to arbitrate plaintiff’s personal claims but have
Johnson v. Lowe’s Home Centers, LLC, 93 F.4th 459 (9th Cir. 2024)
The Ninth Circuit vacated a district court’s dismissal of a former employee’s “non-individual” Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims in the wake of the California Supreme Court’s holding in Adolph v. Uber Techs., Inc., 14 Cal. 5th 1104 (2023). Plaintiff in this case signed a contract with her employer (Lowe’s)
Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., 15 Cal. 5th 582 (2024)
The California Supreme Court affirmed an appellate court judgment that “trial courts lack inherent authority to strike PAGA claims on manageability grounds”—that is, trial courts may not “dismiss [them] with prejudice.” In so holding, the Supreme Court overruled Wesson v. Staples the Office Superstore, LLC, 68 Cal. App. 5th 746 (2021).
The
All eyes will be on the United States this November as Americans head to the polls in the upcoming 2024 general election. Likely to go somewhat less noticed among the Presidential, Senate, and House races this year is a California ballot initiative that would repeal (after 20 long years!) the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004—better known as PAGA. (We previously reported in