Code of Civil Procedure sections 1281.97 and 1281.98 provide that if a company or business that drafts an arbitration agreement does not pay its share of required arbitration fees or costs within 30 days after they are due, the company or business is in “material breach” of the arbitration agreement, and an employee or consumer can, among other things, withdraw his or her claim from arbitration and proceed in court. The trial court correctly allowed De Leon’s claims to proceed in court when Juanita’s Foods was late paying arbitration fees because the statutory 30-day deadline is a bright-line rule that does not give the trial court discretion to consider additional factors such as delay or prejudice. Read more
Save the date for the 2023 New Employment Practitioner Conference! We are proud to provide you with two days of fantastic virtual programs and speakers. Read more
Applying Morgan v. Sundance, Inc. (2022) 142 S.Ct. 1708, the court declined to require a showing of prejudice to establish waiver of the right to arbitrate. Read more
Welcome to the 2022 Advanced Mediation Conference: Practical Skills for Experienced Employment Litigators! We are proud to provide you with two days of fantastic virtual programs and speakers. Read more
Under Labor Code section 1138, no labor organization involved in a labor dispute may be held liable for the unlawful acts of individual officers, members, or agents, “except upon clear proof of actual participation in, or actual authorization of those acts.” The trial court improperly denied a union’s anti-SLAPP motion because the union’s picketing conduct was protected activity and the employer failed to proffer evidence that would clearly prove the union participated in or authorized various unlawful actions by picketers. Read more
The Labor and Employment Law Section is pleased to announce discounted bundle of programming from the 2022 Public Sector Conference. Receive a total of 10 Hours of MCLE for $150! Offer ends September 15, 2022. Read more
California’s Private Attorneys General Act does not violate the separation of powers doctrine by allowing private citizens to seek civil penalties on the state’s behalf without the executive branch exercising sufficient prosecutorial discretion. PAGA is not meaningfully distinguishable from comparable qui tam statutes outside the employment context. Read more