Los Angeles has claimed the top spot on the American Tort Reform Foundation’s (ATRF) annual list of “Judicial Hellholes.”  The Report claims that “lawsuit abuse in Los Angeles . . . has propelled the jurisdiction to the very top of the list.”  According to the ATRF, the plaintiffs’ bar resorts to various litigation tactics that drive Los Angeles’ notorious nuclear verdicts (i.e., those exceeding $10

Remember when the workday ended at 5:00 pm?

In today’s always-on world, the “infinite workday” has quietly taken over—creeping into dinners, weekends, and even that quaint concept known as a “vacation.”  With smartphones in every pocket and teams spread across multiple time zones, work now follows us everywhere.  Microsoft’s 2025 Work Trend Index confirms what many leaders already sense: work is no longer confined by

As we reported here, a split in authority has developed in the California Court of Appeal regarding what to do when an employer moves to compel arbitration of a Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) that is “headless”—that is, a claim seeking penalties on behalf of all allegedly aggrieved employees except the named plaintiff. (This is the latest trick the plaintiff’s bar has come up

On February 26, 2025, in Parra Rodriguez v. Packers Sanitation, Inc., the California Court of Appeal (Fourth Appellate District) issued the latest published decision addressing the practice of filing so-called “headless” Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims.  In such cases, the plaintiff seeks civil penalties for all allegedly aggrieved employees except themself.  In the wake of Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 596

As we previously reported, California recently enacted AB 1076, which reinforces the state’s broad statutory ban on noncompete agreements.  The law took effect on January 1, 2024, and expressly codifies Edwards v. Arthur Andersen LLP, 44 Cal. 4th 937 (2008), a California Supreme Court opinion barring any noncompete, no matter how narrowly tailored it may be.  The new law also affirms

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