Judd v. Weinstein, 967 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 2020)
Actor Ashley Judd brought this sexual harassment claim against motion picture producer Harvey Weinstein under Cal. Civil Code § 51.9, which prohibits such harassment in the context of a “business, service, or professional relationship” between the plaintiff and a physician, psychotherapist, dentist, attorney, real estate agent, accountant, banker, trust officer, executor, trustee, landlord or property manager,
Blue Fountain Pools & Spas Inc. v. Superior Court, 2020 WL 4581664 (Cal. Ct. App. 2020)
Daisy Arias alleged she suffered sustained, egregious sexual harassment for most of the time she was employed by Blue Fountain, which was directed at her by Sean Lagrave, a salesman who worked in the same office as Arias. Although the alleged harassment dated back to when she first began
In 2018, actress Ashley Judd (“Judd”) sued producer Harvey Weinstein (“Weinstein”) for sexual harassment, defamation, intentional interference with prospective economic advantage, and unfair competition. Judd alleges that during a meeting with Weinstein to discuss casting opportunities, she was directed to his hotel room where he appeared in a bathrobe and tried to coerce her into massaging him and watching him shower. See Judd v. Weinste
We invite you to review our newly-posted March 2020 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:
Schmidt v. Superior Court, 44 Cal. App. 5th 570 (2020)
Tamika Schmidt and Danielle Penny, two employees at the Hall of Justice for Ventura Superior Court, claimed they were sexually harassed by a security guard named David Jacques. Schmidt and Penny claimed that Jacques had sexually harassed them with a metal detecting wand during the courthouse entry screening process. All security screening occurred
On Thursday, October 10, 2019, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law several new measures that employers will need to comply with by January 1, 2020 and that will generally make it easier for employees to sue their employers. Specifically:
For the second time this calendar year, a Los Angeles jury ordered an employer to pay $11 million to an employee who claimed to have been sexually harassed. And, once again, the amount of punitive damages ($8 million) dwarfed the amount of compensatory damages ($3.1 million) by a margin of more than two-to-one.
On Friday, the jury ruled against Alki David, a hologram producer
The current landscape in the #MeToo Era has heightened the need for leaders at every business organization to ensure that sound and strategically aligned practices for preventing, receiving, and responding to harassment, discrimination and other workplace related claims are in place.
Proskauer has just released its findings from a broad-based survey of employers around the country who are responding to these pressing issues in real