Lee v. West Kern Water Dist., 5 Cal. App. 5th 606 (2016)

Kathy Lee, an employee of the water district, sued the district and four co-employees for assault and intentional infliction of emotional distress after the co-employees staged a “mock robbery” without Lee’s knowledge and one of them (while wearing a mask) confronted her at the cashier’s window with a note demanding money and

This bill requires by January 1, 2019 that the Division of Occupational Safety and Health propose to the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board for the board’s review and adoption, a heat illness and injury prevention standard applicable to workers working in indoor places of employment. (SB 1167.)

A handheld wireless telephone or electronic wireless communications device may be operated in a manner requiring the use of the driver’s hand while the driver is operating the vehicle only if both of the following conditions are satisfied: (1) The handheld wireless telephone or electronic wireless communications device is mounted on a vehicle’s windshield in the same manner a portable Global Positioning System (GPS) is

Aluma Sys. Concrete Constr. of Cal. v. Nibbi Bros., Inc., 2 Cal. App. 5th 620 (2016)

Aluma (the “Contractor”) was sued by employees of Nibbi Bros. (the “Employer”) for injuries sustained on the job. Contractor sued Employer for indemnification based on the parties’ contract. The trial court sustained the Employer’s demurrer to the complaint on the ground that the employees’ lawsuit set forth claims

Ambat v. City & County of San Francisco, 2014 WL 2959634 (9th Cir. 2014)

The plaintiffs in this case are current and former deputies of the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department (“SFSD”) who challenged the SFSD’s policy prohibiting male deputies from supervising female inmates. The deputies contend that the policy violates Title VII’s prohibition against sex discrimination. The district court granted summary judgment to the

LeFiell Mfg. Co. v. Superior Court, 2012 WL 3570743 (Cal. S. Ct. 2012)

O’Neil Watrous and his wife Nidia filed a civil action against LeFiell Manufacturing for injuries O’Neil suffered while he was operating a swaging machine at work. The swaging machine is a “power press machine” within the meaning of Cal. Labor Code § 4558 – an injury from which provides an exception

SeaBright Ins. Co. v. US Airways, Inc., 52 Cal. 4th 590 (2011)

US Airways uses a conveyor to move luggage at San Francisco International Airport. US Airways hired independent contractor Lloyd W. Aubry Co. to maintain and repair the conveyor and did not direct Aubry’s employees in their work. The conveyor lacked certain safety guards in violation of various Cal-OSHA regulations. After one of

Sanders v. City of Newport, 657 F.3d 772 (2011)

Diane Sanders, a utility billing clerk for the City of Newport, Oregon, began suffering health problems, which (according to her doctor) were due to “multiple chemical sensitivity” triggered by handling low-grade paper at work and poor air quality in her work area. Sanders took an FMLA leave, but the city refused to return her to

Angelotti v. The Walt Disney Co., 192 Cal. App. 4th 1394 (2011)

Anthony Angelotti was injured while rehearsing a stunt for a film that was being produced by Second Mate Productions, Inc. Angelotti sued Second Mate as well as The Walt Disney Company, which provided the financing for the film. Angelotti alleged that Disney had assumed a duty to ensure that the production complied

As of this writing, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has confirmed 109 cases of the H1N1 virus, commonly known as swine flu, in the United States. The World Health Organization has confirmed 331 cases of swine flu worldwide and has raised the pandemic threat level to Phase 5 on its six-step scale (Phase 5 designation essentially means that infections from the outbreak that originated in Mexico have been jumping from person to person with relative ease). This Client Alert outlines a few of the myriad legal issues that employers may face with regard to swine flu. As every situation is different, employers are strongly encouraged to seek the advice of counsel with respect to any questions related to these issues. We are, of course, available to provide a more detailed analysis as to any of the matters discussed below or to advise on any other questions that you may have on pandemic flu planning and its implications for the workplace.