Employment Law Blog

The employment lawyers of Hoyer & Hicks handle cases involving wrongful termination, discrimination, harassment, missed breaks, and unpaid wages in the San Francisco Bay Area and Greater Los Angeles Area. This blog contains portions of our legal research and court submissions and updates about the ever-evolving field of employment law.


Recent Posts

January 2021 Employment Legislation

Starting in January 2021, there will be some new employment legislation going into effect. Here’s a little breakdown of some key things to know, as an employee.

READ MORE

Civil Actions Under the Private Attorneys General Act

Under the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”), an aggrieved employee may bring a civil action personally and on behalf of other current or former employees and the State of California to recover civil penalties for Labor Code violations. Iskanian v. CLS Transp. Los Angeles, LLC (2014) 59 Cal.4th 348, 380. Seventy-five percent of any PAGA penalties go to the Labor & Workforce Development Agency (“LWDA”), leaving the remaining 25 percent for the employees. Id.; see also ZB, N.A. v. Superior Court (2019) 8 Cal.5th 175, 275. PAGA is intended to augment the limited enforcement capability of LWDA by empowering employees to enforce the Labor Code as representatives of the Agency. Id. at p. 383. A judgment in a PAGA action binds all those who would be bound by a judgment in an action brought by the government. Id. at 381.

READ MORE

Instacart Wage-and-Hour Settlement

ATTORNEY ADVERTISEMENT Our firm filed a representative action on behalf of Aggrieved Employees and the State of California against Instacart in Santa Clara County in 2018: Ornelas v. Maplebear, Inc. (d/b/a lnstacart), case no. 18CV323046. Based on our client’s experiences, we alleged that lnstacart’s timekeeping app deleted employees’ hours worked on cancelled jobs and failed […]

READ MORE

Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County

Under the “ABC Test” established by the California Supreme Court in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County, a worker is an employee if any of the following conditions are met:

READ MORE

Wage and Hour Class Action Mediation Brief

Section 510 of the Labor Code and the applicable IWC Wage Order require employers to pay overtime for hours worked beyond eight in a day and forty in a week (and double-time as provided in the statute and Wage Order).

READ MORE

Awarding Attorneys Fees in PAGA Actions

Under PAGA, an aggrieved employee may bring a civil action personally and on behalf of other current or former employees and the state of California to recover civil penalties for Labor Code violations. Iskanian v. CLS Transp. Los Angeles, LLC (2014) 59 Cal.4th 348, 380. Seventy-five percent of any PAGA penalties go to the LWDA, leaving the remaining 25 percent for the employees. Id. PAGA is intended to augment the limited enforcement capability of by empowering employees to enforce the Labor Code as representatives of the Agency. Id. at p. 383. A judgment in a PAGA action binds all those who would be bound by a judgment in an action brought by the government. Id. at 381.

READ MORE

Class Action Settlements in California

The well-recognized factors that a trial court should consider in evaluating the reasonableness of the value of a class action settlement agreement include, but are not limited to:
[T]he strength of plaintiffs’ case, the risk, expense, complexity and likely duration of further litigation, the risk of maintaining class action status through trial, the amount offered in settlement, the extent of discovery completed and stage of proceedings, the experience and views of counsel, the presence of a governmental participant, and the reaction of the class members to the proposed settlement.
Dunk v. Ford Motor Co. (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 1794, 1801.

READ MORE

Break Laws and Class Action Procedure

Labor Code §§ 226.7 and 512 and the applicable wage orders require employers to authorize and permit meal periods to their employees. California law prohibits employers from employing an employee for more than five hours without a meal period of at least 30 minutes.

READ MORE

Misleading Communications in Class Action Lawsuits

Misleading communications “pose a serious threat to the fairness of the litigation process, the adequacy of representation, and the administration of justice generally.” Cheverez, supra, at *4-6; Howard Gunty, supra, 88 Cal.App4th at 582. The “responsibility to monitor communications is heightened where potential class members are unrepresented by their own counsel.” Cheverez at *6. Courts have found that this responsibility is also heightened when an employer engages in unsupervised communications with its workers regarding a settlement offer. See Marino v. CACafe, Inc. (N.D.Cal. April 28, 2017) 2017 WL 1540717 (“in the context of class action litigation, whether pre- or post-certification, unsupervised communications between an employer and its workers present an acute risk of coercion and abuse.”)

READ MORE



Tags

  • 18 U.S.C. § 2701
  • 18 U.S.C. §§1341
  • 29 C.F.R. § 541.108
  • 29 C.F.R. § 541.201(a)
  • 29 C.F.R. § 541.205(a)
  • 29 C.F.R. § 541.205(c)
  • 29 C.F.R. § 541.205(c)(2)
  • 29 C.F.R. § 541.207(a)
  • 29 C.F.R. § 541.207(c)(1)
  • 29 C.F.R. 785.15
  • 29 C.F.R. 785.16
  • 29 U.S.C. §203(d)
  • 29 U.S.C. §203(e)(1)
  • 29 U.S.C. §206
  • 29 U.S.C. §207(a)(1)
  • 29 U.S.C. §216(b)
  • 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a)
  • 49 U.S.C. § 14501(c)
  • 49 U.S.C. § 41713(b)(4)(A)
  • 49 U.S.C. §14501(c)(1)
  • 8 CCR § 11040
  • 9 U.S.C. §§2-16
  • AB 2257
  • AB 5
  • Abdulla v. U.S. Sec. Assocs.
  • Accommodations
  • ADA
  • Adams v. Inter-Con Sec. Sys. Inc.
  • Air Transport Assn. of America v. City and County of San Francisco
  • Air Transport Association of America v. City and County of San Francisco
  • Airline Deregulation Act
  • Alberts v Aurora Behavioral Health Care
  • Alonzo v. Maximus Inc.
  • Alternative Workweek Schedule
  • Alvarez v. Hill
  • Amaral v. Cintas Corp. No. 2
  • American Airlines Inc. v. Wolens
  • Americans with Disabilities Act
  • Amiri v. Cox Communications California LLC
  • Anderson v. Liberty Lobby Inc.
  • Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co.
  • Arakaki v. Cayetano
  • arbitration
  • Arias v. Superior Court
  • Armenta v. Osmose Inc.
  • Arredondo v. Delano Farms Co.
  • Associated Brewers Distributing Co. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County
  • AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion
  • Augustus v. ABM Security Services Inc.
  • Augustus v. American Commercial Security
  • Avilez v. Pinkerton Government Services
  • Aydin Cor v. Loral Corp.
  • Bagatti v. Department of Rehabilitation
  • Ballaris v. Wacker Siltronic Corp.
  • Barnett v. U.S. Air Inc.
  • Barnhill v. Robert Saunders & Co.
  • Beck v. University of Wis. Bd. Of Regents
  • Benton
  • Benton v. Telecom Network Specialists Inc.
  • Beverly Hills Nat. Bank & Trust Co. v. Superior Court In and For Los Angeles County
  • Biggs v. Joshua Hendy Corp.
  • Blakemore v. Superior Court
  • Blinder v. Superior Court
  • Blinder v. Superior Court (1987) 196 Cal.App.3d 893
  • Board of Medical Quality Assurance v. Gherardini
  • Board of Medical Quality Assurance v. Gherardini (1979) 93 Cal.App.3d 669
  • Borello
  • Boston v. Penny Lane Centers Inc.
  • Boucher v. Shaw
  • Bowers v. First Student Inc.
  • Bradley v. Networkers International LLC
  • Brennan v. Elmer’s Disposal Serv. Inc.
  • Brewer v. Gen. Nutrition Corp.
  • Bridge Fund Capital Corp. v. Fastbucks Franchise Corp.
  • Bright v. 99 Cents Only Stores
  • Brinker
  • Brinker Rest. Corp. v. Super. Ct.
  • Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court
  • Britt v. Sup. Ct.
  • Britt v. Sup. Ct. (1978) 20 Cal.3d 844
  • Brown v. American Airlines Inc.
  • Bufil v. Dollar Financial Group Inc.
  • Bus. & Prof. Code§7028
  • C.C.P § 2023.030(c)
  • C.C.P. § 2016.040
  • C.C.P. § 2017.010
  • C.C.P. § 2023.010
  • C.C.P. § 2023.030(a)
  • C.C.P. § 2023.030(b)
  • C.C.P. § 2023.450(g)(1)
  • C.C.P. § 2025.010
  • C.C.P. § 2025.280(a)
  • C.C.P. § 2025.450(a)
  • C.C.P. § 2025.450(b)
  • C.C.P. § 2030.290(c)
  • C.C.P. § 382
  • C.C.P. § 904.1(a)(11)
  • C.C.P. §2030.300(e)
  • C.C.R. § 11040
  • C.C.R. § 11160
  • C.C.R. § 13520
  • C.F.R § 541.207-208
  • C.F.R. § 516.2(a)(7)
  • C.F.R. § 541.201-205
  • C.F.R. § 541.210
  • C.F.R. § 778.109
  • C.F.R. § 778.118
  • C.F.R. § 778.209
  • C.F.R. § 778.223
  • C.F.R. § 778.315
  • C.F.R. § 785.11
  • C.F.R. § 785.13
  • C.F.R. § 785.18
  • C.F.R. § 785.19(a)
  • C.F.R. § 790.21(b)(2)
  • C.F.R. §778.110(b)
  • C.F.R. §778.211
  • C.F.R. 541.215
  • C.F.R. 785.19(a)
  • C.F.R. 785.19(b)
  • Cabesuela v. Browning-Ferris Industries of California Inc.
  • Cal. Gov. Code §12926(n)(2)
  • Cal. Ins. Code §§1871
  • Cal. Labor Code §98.6(a)
  • Cal/OSHA
  • Caliber Bodyworks Inc. v. Superior Court
  • California Code of Regulations § 11040
  • California Family Rights Act
  • California Labor Code §1102.5
  • California Labor Code §1102.6
  • California Labor Code §226
  • California Labor Code §226.7
  • Californians For Safe & Competitive Dump Truck Transp. v. Mendonca
  • Camp v. Alexander
  • Carabini v. Superior Court
  • Cardenas v. McLane Foodservice Inc.
  • Cardenas v. McLane FoodServices Inc.
  • CCP § 187
  • Celotex Corp. v. Catrett
  • CFRA
  • Charas v. Trans World Airlines Inc.
  • Chavez v. United States
  • Cheverez v. Plains All American Pipeline LP
  • Church v. Consolidated Freightways Inc.
  • Cicairos v. Summit Logistics Inc.
  • Cipollone v. Liggett Group Inc.
  • Civ. Code § 338(a)
  • Civil Code §1638
  • Civil Code §1639
  • Civil Code §3517
  • Civil Rights Act of 1964
  • class action certification
  • class arbitration
  • Claudio v. Regents of University of California
  • Clicks Billiards Inc. v. Sixshooters Inc.
  • Code Civ. Proc. § 2023.030
  • Code Civ. Proc. § 2025.420(d)
  • Code Civ. Proc. § 382
  • Code Civ. Proc. § 527(c)(1)
  • Code Civ. Proc. 2025.420(b)(12)
  • Code of Civil Procedure § 382
  • Collective Bargaining Agreement
  • Collier v. Superior Court
  • Collins v. Rocha
  • Colores v. Board of Trustees
  • Colwell v. Rite Aid Corp.
  • communications with class members
  • Cornwell v. Electra Cent. Credit Union
  • County of Santa Clara v. Astra USA Inc.
  • Cox v. Ocean View Hotel Corp.
  • Cramer v. Consolidated Freightways Inc.
  • Criado v. IBM Corp
  • Davis v. Sup. Ct. (1992) 7 Cal.App. 4th 1008
  • Davis v. Superior Court
  • Dawn v. Sterling Drug Inc.
  • Deeter v. Angus
  • Department of Fair Employment and Housing
  • DFEH
  • Diaz v. Fed. Express Corp.
  • Dietrick v. Securitas Sec. Servs. USA Inc.
  • Dilts v. Penske Logistics LLC
  • Disability Accommodations
  • Division of Labor Standards Enforcement
  • DLSE
  • Do v. Superior Court
  • Donovan v. Crisostomo
  • Donovan v. New Floridian Hotel Inc.
  • Dunbar Armored Inc. v. Rea
  • Dunk v. Ford Motor Co.
  • Edwards v. City of Long Beach
  • employee status
  • Engalla v. Permanente Medical Group Inc.
  • Evidence Code §500
  • F.W. Stock & Sons Inc. v. Thompson
  • FAA
  • FAAAA
  • Failure to Accommodate
  • Fair Employment and Housing Act
  • Fair Labor Standards Act
  • Faulkinbury v. Boyd
  • Faulkinbury v. Boyd & Associates
  • Faulkinbury v. Boyd & Associates Inc.
  • Federal Arbitration Act
  • Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994
  • Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 12(c)
  • Federal Rule of Civil Procedure rule 56
  • Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
  • Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 12(d)
  • FEHA
  • Feliciano v. Rhode Island
  • Fenley v. Rite Aid Corp.
  • Fitz-Gerald v. Skywest Airlines Inc.
  • Fitzgerald v. Cassil (N.D.Cal. 2003) 216 F.R.D. 632
  • Flait v. North American Watch Corp.
  • Flores v. Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc.
  • FLSA
  • food service workers
  • Forest Conservation Council v. U.S. Forest Serv.
  • Fox v. Hale & Norcross Silver Mtn. Co.
  • FRCP 24(a)
  • FRCP 24(b)
  • FRCP 24(b)(1)(B)
  • FRCP 24(b)(3)
  • Freund v. Nycomed Amersham
  • Fry
  • Fry v. Hayt Hayt & Landau
  • Fussell v. Timec Company Inc.
  • Galanek v. Wismar
  • Gantt v. Sentry Insurance
  • Garcia v. Rockwell Internat. Corp.
  • Gardner Construction Co. v. Assurance Co. of America
  • Gardner v. Shell Oil Co.
  • Gelfo v. Lockheed Martin Corp.
  • Gen. Tel. Co. of S.W. v. Falcon
  • General Conference Corp. of Seventh-Day Adventists v. Seventh-Day Adventist Congregational Church
  • Gentry v. Super. Ct.
  • Ghazaryan v. Diva Limousine Ltd.
  • Gilb v. Chiang
  • Global Minerals & Metals Corp. v. Superior Court
  • Gonzalez v. Preferred Freezer Services LBF LLC
  • Gould v. Maryland Sound Industries Inc.
  • Gov. Code §12926(f)
  • Gov. Code §12940(m)
  • Gov’t Code § 12940(n)
  • Government Code § 12926.1(c)
  • Government Code § 12926(l)
  • Green v. Ralee Eng’g Co.
  • Guifu Li v. A Perfect Day Franchise Inc.
  • Guifu Li v. Perfect Day Franchise Inc.
  • Gulf Oil Co. v. Bernard
  • Gulf Oil v. Bernard
  • Gutierrez v. California Commerce Club Inc.
  • Hahn v. Mirda
  • Hal Roach Studios Inc. v. Richard Feiner & Co. Inc.
  • Hale v. Morgan
  • Hall v. Rite Aid Corp.
  • Hanlon
  • Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp.
  • Hanson v. Lucky Stores Inc.
  • Haro v. City of Los Angeles
  • Harrington v. Payroll Entertainment Services Inc.
  • Harris v. Sup. Ct.
  • Harris v. Sup. Ct. (1992) 3 Cal.App.4th 661
  • Harris v. Vector Mktg. Corp
  • Hart v. Massanari
  • Hasbrouck v. Texaco Inc.
  • Heda v. Sup. Ct. (1990) 225 Cal.App.3d 525
  • Hendershot v. Ready to Roll Trans. Inc.
  • Hentzel v. Singer Co.
  • Heritage Residential Care Inc. v. DLSE
  • Herman v. Hector I. Nieves Transport Inc.
  • Hernandez v. Vitamin Shoppe Industries Inc.
  • Heyen v. Safeway (2013)
  • Hicks v. Kaufman & Broad Home Corp.
  • Hill v. National Collegiate Athletic Association
  • Hill v. RL Carriers Inc.
  • Hoffman-La Roche Inc. v. Sperling
  • Home Depot U.S.A. Inc. v. Superior Court
  • Hoohuli v. Lingle
  • Horsford v. Board of Trustees of California State University
  • Howard Gunty Profit Sharing Plan v. Superior Court
  • Huene v. U.S. Dept. of the Treasury
  • Huffman v. Interstate Brands Corp.
  • Huntington Memorial Hospital v. Superior Court
  • I. E. S. Corp. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County
  • ICCTA
  • In re Lifschutz (1970) 2 Cal.3d 415
  • In re Wells Fargo Home Mortg. Overtime Pay Litigation
  • independent contractor
  • Industrial Welfare Com. v. Superior Court
  • Industrial Welfare Commission
  • Inherent.com v. Martindale-Hubbell
  • Instacart
  • Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act
  • Iskanian v. CLS Transp. Los Angeles LLC
  • Isuzu Motors Ltd. v. Consumers Union of U.S. Inc.
  • IWC Wage Order 0-2001 §4(A)
  • IWC Wage Order No. 16
  • IWC Wage Order No. 4
  • IWC Wage Order No. 5
  • IWC Wage Order No. 9
  • iwe
  • Iwekaogwu v. City of Los Angeles
  • Jaimez v. DAIOHS USA Inc.
  • Jensen v. Wells Fargo Bank
  • Jeske v. California Dept. of Corrections and Rehabilitation
  • Johnson v. GlaxoSmithKline Inc.
  • Johnson v. Serenity Transportation Inc.
  • Jones v. Sup. Ct. (1981) 119 Cal.App.3d 534
  • Jordan v. NCI Grp. Inc.
  • Juarez v. Boy Scouts of America Inc.
  • Kamar v. Radio Shack Corp.
  • Kimbro v. Atlantic Richfield Co.
  • Kress v. PriceWaterhouseCoopers LLP
  • Kuhns v. State of California
  • L-7 Designs Inc. v. Old Navy LLC
  • La Sala v. American Sav. & Loan Assn.
  • Lab. Code §1102.5(c)
  • Labor Code
  • Labor Code § 1102.5
  • Labor Code § 1102.5(b)
  • Labor Code § 1102.6
  • Labor Code § 1194(a)
  • Labor Code § 1199
  • Labor Code § 200
  • Labor Code § 201(a)
  • Labor Code § 203
  • Labor Code § 203(a)
  • Labor Code § 203(b)
  • Labor Code § 204
  • Labor Code § 210
  • Labor Code § 221
  • Labor Code § 226
  • Labor Code § 226.3
  • Labor Code § 226.7
  • Labor Code § 226.7(c)
  • Labor Code § 226(a)
  • Labor Code § 226(e)(2)
  • Labor Code § 2698
  • Labor Code § 2699
  • Labor Code § 2699.3
  • Labor Code § 2699(e)(2)
  • Labor Code § 2699(f)
  • Labor Code § 2699(g)(1)
  • Labor Code § 2699(l)
  • Labor Code § 2802
  • Labor Code § 510
  • Labor Code § 510(a)
  • Labor Code § 511
  • Labor Code § 512
  • Labor Code § 515(a)
  • Labor Code § 558
  • Labor Code § 6310
  • Labor Code § 6311
  • Labor Code § 6400
  • Labor Code § 98
  • Labor Code §§ 1174-1175
  • Labor Code §§ 201 and 203
  • Labor Code §§ 201-203
  • Labor Code §§ 226.7 and 512
  • Labor Code §§ 6400-6403
  • Labor Code §1194 (a)
  • Labor Code §510
  • Labor Code §6401
  • Labor Code §6402
  • Labor Code §6403
  • Labor Management Relations Act
  • Lafitte v. Robert Half Intern. Inc.
  • Lambert v. Ackerly
  • Lantz v. Sup. Ct.
  • Lantz v. Sup. Ct. (1994) 28 Cal.App.4th 1839
  • Lazar v. Superior Court
  • Leuthold v. Destination America Inc.
  • Lewis v. Wells Fargo & Co
  • Lewis v. Wells Fargo & Co.
  • Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. LcL Administrators Inc.
  • Linder v. Thrifty Oil Co.
  • Lingle v. Norge Div. of Magic Chef Inc.
  • LMRA
  • Lowy Development Corp. v. Superior Court
  • Luchetti v. Hershey Co.
  • Luque v. AT&T Corp.
  • LWDA
  • Maddock v. KB Homes Inc.
  • Madera Police Officers Assn. v. City of Madera
  • Makaeff v. Trump Univ. LLC
  • Marino v. CACafe Inc.
  • Martinez v. Combs
  • Massey v. Ojaniit
  • Mayle v. Felix
  • McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green
  • McLaughlin v. Ho Fat Seto
  • McVeigh v. Recology San Francisco
  • meal breaks
  • Mendez v. Superior Court
  • Mendez v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 557
  • Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Massachusetts
  • Mevorah v. Wells Fargo Home Mortg.
  • Milan v. City of Holtville (2010) 186 Cal. App. 4th 1028
  • Mills v. Joshua Hendy Corp.
  • misclassification
  • Misra v. Decision One Mortg. Co.
  • Mohamed v. Uber Techs. Inc.
  • Monzon v. Schaefer Ambulance Service Inc.
  • Morales v. Trans World Airlines Inc.
  • Moran v. Superior Court in and for Sacramento County
  • Morillion v. Royal Packing Co.
  • Morris v. Ernst & Young LLP
  • Morton v. Valley Farm Transp. Inc.
  • motion to compel arbitration
  • Murphy v. Kenneth Cole
  • Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Productions Inc.
  • Narayan v. EGL Inc.
  • National Council Against Health Fraud Inc. v. King Bio Pharmaceuticals Inc.
  • New York State Conference of Blue Cross & Blue Shield Plans v. Travelers Insurance Company
  • O’Connor v. Uber Technologies Inc.
  • Oakland City Ordinance 5.64.040
  • Oakland Municipal Code 5.64.010
  • Oakland Municipal Code 5.64.040
  • Oakland Taxicab Ordinance
  • off the clock
  • Ortega v. J.B. Hunt Transport Inc.
  • OSHA
  • Oyarzo v. Tuolumne Fire Dist.
  • Pacesetter Sys. Inc. v. Medtronic Inc.
  • PAGA
  • Palay v. Sup. Ct.
  • Palay v. Sup. Ct. (1993) 18 Cal.App.4th 919
  • Parris v. Sup.Ct.
  • penalties
  • People ex rel. Harris v. Pac Anchor Transp. Inc.
  • People v. Blair
  • People v. Bradley
  • Perryman v. Dorman
  • Phillip v. Mayo Clinic Arizona
  • Pioneer Electronics (USA) Inc. v. Superior Court
  • Plaisted v. Dress Barn Inc.
  • Planned Parenthood Golden Gate v. Superior Court
  • Poland v. Chertoff
  • predominance
  • premium wages
  • Price v. McDonald’s Corp.
  • Price v. Starbucks Corp.
  • Prilliman v. United Air Lines inc.
  • Prillman v. United Air Lines Inc.
  • Prince v. CLS Transp. Inc.
  • Private Attorneys General Act
  • Puritan Ins. Co. v. Sup.Ct. (Tri-C Machine Corp.)
  • Pyramid Technologies Inc. v. Hartford Cas. Ins. Co.
  • Ramirez v. Fox Television Station Inc.
  • Ramirez v. Ghilotti Bros. Inc.
  • Ramirez v. Yosemite Water Co.
  • Real v. Driscoll Strawberry Associates Inc.
  • Reece v. Houston Lighting & Power Co.
  • Reinhardt v. Gemini Motor Transport
  • Rent-A-Center West Inc. v. Jackson
  • Renteria v. K&R Transportation Inc.
  • Retiree Support Group of Contra Costa County v. Contra Costa County
  • Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp.
  • Richmond v. Dart Industries Inc.
  • Rivera v. Rivera
  • Road Sprinkler Fitters Local Union No. 669 v. G & G Fire Sprinklers Inc.
  • Roberson v. Danny Ontiveros
  • Roberts v. Superior Court (1973) 9 Cal.3d 330
  • Robinson v. George
  • Roe v. Sup. Ct. (1991) 229 Cal.App.3d 832
  • Rose v. City of Hayward
  • Rother v. Lupenko
  • Rowe v. New Hampshire Motor Transport Association
  • Rubin v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc.
  • Ruiz v. Affinity Logistics Corp.
  • Russell v. Wells Fargo & Co.
  • S.G. Borello & Sons Inc. v. Dept. of Indust. Rel.
  • Salazar v. McDonald’s Corp.
  • Salazar v. U.S. Department of Justice
  • San Diego Unified Port Dist. v. Superior Court
  • Sanchez v. Swissport Inc.
  • Sarviss v. Gen. Dynamics Information Tech Inc.
  • Sav-On Drug Stores
  • Sav-On Drug Stores Inc. v. Superior Court
  • SB 1383
  • Seastrom v. Neways Inc.
  • settlement
  • Seymore v. Metson Marine Inc.
  • Shaw v. Delta Air Lines Inc.
  • Skerski v. Time Warner Cable
  • Slavkov v. Fast Water Heater I LP
  • Slesinger Inc v. Walt Disney Co.
  • Smith v. Marsh
  • Sotelo v. MediaNews Group Inc.
  • Soules v. Cadam Inc.
  • Spitzer v. Good Guys Inc.
  • Spitzer v. Good Guys Inc. (2000) 80 Cal.App.4th 1376
  • St. John v. Employment Development Dept.
  • St. Mary’s Honor Ctr. v. Hicks
  • Stanfield v. First NLC Fin. Servs. LLC
  • Starving Students Inc. v. Department Of Industrial Relations
  • Stolt-Nielsen
  • Suckow Borax Mines Consol. v. Borax Consol.
  • Sullivan v. Oracle Corp.
  • superior method
  • Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co.
  • Tarkington v. California Unemployment Ins. Appeals Bd.
  • Tatkin v. Superior Court In and For Los Angeles County
  • Taylor v. Phoenixville School Dist.
  • Tennessee Coal Iron & R. Co. v. Muscoda Local No. 123
  • Thibault v. Bellsouth Telecommunications Inc.
  • Thiebes v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc.
  • Thurman v. Bayshore Transit Management Inc.
  • tip pooling
  • Title VII
  • Townsend v. Superior Court
  • Turner v. Anheuser-Busch Inc.
  • Tylo v. Superior Court
  • Tylo v. Superior Court (1997) 55 Cal.App.4th 1379
  • typicality
  • U.S. Constitution Article VI
  • U.S. v. Ewald Iron Co.
  • U.S.C. § 12111(9)(B)
  • U.S.C. § 185
  • U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a)
  • U.S.C. § 202
  • U.S.C. § 203
  • U.S.C. § 207(a)(1)
  • U.S.C. § 216
  • U.S.C. § 216(b)
  • U.S.C. § 255(a)
  • U.S.C. § 260
  • U.S.C. §§ 206 207(a)(1)
  • U.S.C. §§ 211(c) 215(a)(5)
  • U.S.C. §215(a)(3)
  • U.S.C. 211(c)
  • U.S.C. Title 18 § 1511
  • Vallbona v. Springer
  • Viceral v. Mistras Group Inc.
  • Villalobos v. Calandri Sonrise Farm LP
  • Volt Info. Scis. Inc. v. Bd. of Trs. of Leland Stanford Jr. Univ.
  • Wage Order 4-2001
  • Waller v. Truck Ins. Exchange Inc.
  • Wang v. Chinese Daily News Inc.
  • Watkins v. Ameripride Servs.
  • Whistleblowing
  • White v. Davis
  • Widjaja v. YUM! Brands Inc.
  • Williams v. Marshall
  • Williams v. Russ
  • Willner v. Manpower Inc.
  • Wilson v. County of Orange
  • Wilson v. County of Orange (2009) 169 Cal.App.4th 1185
  • Wood v. Superior Court
  • Wood v. Superior Court (1985) 166 Cal.App.3d 1138
  • Wynn v. National Broad Co. Inc.
  • Yellow Creek Logging Cor v. Dare
  • Yokoyama
  • Yong v. I.N.S.
  • ZB N.A. v. Superior Court
  • Zuniga v. United Can Co.