Statute of Limitations

LaCour v. Marshalls of Cal., LLC, 2023 WL 5543622 (Cal. Ct. App. 2023)

Plaintiff Robert LaCour, a former “loss prevention specialist” for Marshalls, appealed from a judgment in favor of his former employer and certain affiliated entities.  Marshalls filed a demurrer arguing that because LaCour’s employment with Marshalls ended in May 2019, he had only a year and 65 days to bring a PAGA

We invite you to review our newly-posted September 2023 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:

We invite you to review our newly-posted October 2022 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:

Kaur v. Foster Poultry Farms LLC, 2022 WL 4243090 (Cal. Ct. App. 2022)

Gurdip Kaur sued her former employer, Foster Farms, for discrimination based on disability and race/national origin, retaliation and violation of the whistleblower statute (Cal. Lab. Code § 1102.5).  Prior to filing this lawsuit, Kaur filed a petition against Foster Farms with the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (the “WCAB”), asserting a violation

We invite you to review our newly-posted July 2022 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:

Cardenas v. Horizon Senior Living, Inc., 78 Cal. App. 5th 1065 (2022)

The victim of a felony has an extended statute of limitations in which to bring an action for personal injury or wrongful death against the person convicted of that felony pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 340.3 (“Section 340.3”). Mauricio Cardenas (who suffered from dementia) was a resident of Horizon Senior

Fierro v. Landry’s Rest. Inc., 23 Cal. App. 5th 325 (2018)

Jorge Fierro filed this class action, claiming that he and the other members of the putative class were misclassified as exempt employees and that, in fact, they were non-exempt, non-managerial employees who are owed unpaid overtime wages and penalties. Landry’s responded by filing a demurrer, claiming that the claims are barred by

Aviles-Rodriguez v. Los Angeles Cmty. Coll. Dist., 2017 WL 3712199 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017)

Guillermo Aviles-Rodriguez was employed as a professor for the Los Angeles Community College District (“LACCD”). Although Aviles-Rodriguez was notified on March 5, 2014 that his tenure had been denied by the Board of Trustees of the LACCD, his employment did not end until June 30, 2014, which was the last day

Richtek USA, Inc. v. uPI Semiconductor Corp., 242 Cal. App. 4th 651 (2015)

Richtek sued three of its former employees (all residents of Taiwan) and the company they formed (uPI Semiconductor) for misappropriation of Richtek’s trade secrets. The trial court sustained the former employees’ demurrer to the complaint on the ground that the lawsuit was barred by the Taiwanese statute of limitations after taking

Ellis v. U.S. Sec. Assocs., 224 Cal. App. 4th 1213 (2014)

When Ashley Ellis applied to work as a security guard for U.S. Security Associates, she signed an employment application that purported to limit the statute of limitations to six months for any employment-related claims. Later, Ellis claimed to have been sexually harassed by her supervisor and filed a lawsuit within 12 months of