Labor and Employment Law
Ca. Labor & Emp't Rev. March 2020, Volume 34, No. 2
Content
- Public Sector Case Notes
- Nlra Case Notes
- Fresh Perspectives: Gaining Trial Experience
- Assembly Bill 51: Past and Future
- Cases Pending Before the California Supreme Court
- Message From the Chair
- Masthead
- Inside the Law Review
- McLe Self-Study: a Year of Turmoil in California Arbitration Law
- Assembly Bill 51: Past and Future
- Wage and Hour Case Notes
- Oto, L.L.C. v. Kho: Employee's Perspective
- Message From the Chair
- Inside the Law Review
- Employment Law Case Notes
- Oto, L.L.C. v. Kho: Employee's Perspective
- Public Sector Case Notes
- Cases Pending Before the California Supreme Court
- Employment Law Case Notes
- Wage and Hour Case Notes
- Nlra Case Notes
- Labor & Employment Law Section Executive Committee 2019-2020
- Labor & Employment Law Section Executive Committee 2019-2020
- Fresh Perspectives: Gaining Trial Experience
- Masthead
- McLe Self-Study: a Year of Turmoil in California Arbitration Law
OTO, L.L.C. v. Kho: Employee’s Perspective
By David A. Rosenfeld
David Rosenfeld received his law degree in 1973 from Berkeley Law, where he developed his interest in labor law. He is a partner with Weinberg, Roger & Rosenfeld, which has offices statewide. He has taught various courses at Berkeley Law since 2005, when he developed a seminar entitled "Representing Low Wage Workers." He is a co-author of California Workers Rights, published by the Institute for Research on Labor and Employment at U.C. Berkeley. Mr. Rosenfeld was counsel for the defendant and respondent Ken Kho, and argued the case to the California Supreme Court.
Introduction
On August 29, 2019, the California Supreme Court decided OTO, L.L.C. v. Kho ("OTO").1 It is the third of three cases2 decided by that court dealing with the relationship between arbitration and the Berman hearing process.3