Lara v. WCAB, 182 Cal.App.4th 393 (2010)

The Metro Diner hired Luis Lara as a gardener twice during a 12-month period to prune the bushes around the diner. Lara fell off the roof of the diner while pruning the bushes and injured his head, back, neck and other parts of his body. After the fall, Lara filed a workers’ compensation claim against Metro and

Diaz v. Carcamo, 182 Cal.App.4th 339 (2010)

Dawn Diaz was seriously injured when she was struck by a car that jumped a freeway center divider following its collision with a truck that was driven by Jose Carcamo (a truck driver who was employed by Sugar Transport). Diaz sued both drivers as well as Sugar Transport and obtained a jury verdict in the amount of

Chavez v. City of Los Angeles, 47 Cal. 4th 970 (2010)

Over the course of six years, Robert Chavez, a Los Angeles Police Department officer, and his wife filed multiple lawsuits against the LAPD and other members of the LAPD, alleging a variety of claims involving discrimination, harassment and retaliation. In this particular lawsuit, Chavez alleged the city and three of his supervisors had

Narouz v. Charter Communications, LLC, 591 F.3d 1261 (9th Cir. 2010)

Hani Narouz filed a complaint against Charter Communications in which he alleged causes of action for wrongful termination in violation of public policy, as well as statutory violations of the California Labor Code for failure to pay wages, provide meal periods, maintain accurate itemized wage statements, and unfair competition under Business & Professions

As we reported previously, in December 2007 the National Labor Relations Board issued a decision relating to company e-mail policies in The Guard Publishing Company, d/b/a The Register-Guard, 351 NLRB No. 70 (2007), holding that an employer (i) may restrict the use of its computer systems to business related uses only, and (ii) could distinguish between personal and organizational solicitation in enforcing its no-solicitation policy.

Earlier this week, in The Register-Guard v. NLRB, No. 07-1528 (D.C. Cir July 7, 2009), the D.C. Circuit issued its decision reversing, in part, the Board’s decision.

Neither party requested review of (and, thus, the court did not address) the Board’s general holding that allowed restricting the use of company e-mail to business purposes.  The Court also chose not to address the Board’s position on distinguishing between the types of solicitation. Instead, it held that based on the facts of this particular case — where the policy in question did not actually make a distinction between types of solicitation — the employer could not discipline an employee for a union-related solicitation. As discussed below, the decision highlights the risks to employers who act based on the current Board law in the absence of a clear written policy that makes an explicit distinction between types of solicitation. Moreover, even if employers have such a policy now, the future Obama Board is likely to modify the current law.

D’Este v. Bayer Corp., 565 F.3d 1119 (9th Cir. 2009)

The Ninth Circuit has certified two questions of law to be answered by the California Supreme Court pursuant to Cal. Rule of Court 8.548: (1) Does a pharmaceutical sales representative (“PSR”) qualify as an “outside salesperson” under Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders 1-2001 and 4-2001 if the PSR spends more than half the working

FLIR Sys., Inc. v. Parrish, 174 Cal. App. 4th 1270 (2009)

FLIR Systems purchased Indigo Systems, which manufactures and sells microbolometers (a device used in connection with infrared cameras, night vision and thermal imaging), for $185 million in 2004. William Parrish and Timothy Fitzgibbons were shareholders and officers of Indigo before the company was sold to FLIR; after the sale, they continued working for