Rosenwald v. Kimberly-Clark - filed Sept. 24, 2025

Employment Law A district court may not establish diversity of citizenship purely by judicial notice. Plaintiffs cannot meet the amount in controversy requirement by adding claims for attorney fees. Rosenwald v. Kimberly-Clark - filed Sept. 24, 2025 Cite as 2025 S.O.S. 24-299 Full text click here >http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0925//24-299

Bronshteyn v. Dept. of Consumer Affairs - filed Sept. 17, 2025

Employment Law When the plaintiff files a case with the prospect of recovering attorney fees and the defendant files a flood of unselective and fruitless motions, a court may look with a wary eye at defense complaints about a whopping plaintiff’s bill; an experienced trial judge with the ringside seat is situated to evaluate the quality of a trial lawyer’s performance; a judge is not required to use the prevailing hourly rates as a ceiling instead of a base. Trial courts are not required to issue any statement of decision with regard to a fee award. Bronshteyn v. Dept. of Consumer Affairs - filed Sept. 17, 2025, Second District, Div. Eight Cite as 2025 S.O.S. 2509 Full text click here >http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0925//E085719

Kruitbosch v. Bakersfield Recovery Services - filed Sept. 8, 2025, Fifth District

Employment Law The harassing conduct of a nonsupervisory coworker occurring away from the workplace is not imputable to the employer where there were no allegations indicating the conduct occurred from a workplace modality the employer provided or sanctioned explicitly or implicitly; an employer’s refusal to take any action about the harassing conduct, while simultaneously mocking plaintiff’s concerns, could be viewed as having the effect of altering plaintiff’s work environment in an objectively severe manner. Kruitbosch v. Bakersfield Recovery Services - filed Sept. 8, 2025, Fifth District Cite as 2025 S.O.S. 2405 Full text click here >http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0925//F087809

Biani v. Showtime Networks - filed Sept. 8, 2025

Intellectual Property In assessing the plausibility of plaintiff’s allegations that defendant copied protected aspects of her work, the district court improperly filtered out unprotectable elements of the works, which is the extrinsic test for unlawful appropriation; this error was harmless where the allegations were insufficient to plausibly infer copying, even considering unprotectable elements of the two works; plaintiff’s claim also independently failed the unlawful appropriation analysis because she failed to allege substantial similarity in protectable expression. Biani v. Showtime Networks - filed Sept. 8, 2025 Cite as 24-3949 Full text click here >http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0825//24-3949

Asuncion v. Hegseth

Employment Law Claims brought under the Rehabilitation Act are governed by the same remedies, procedures, and rights applicable to Title VII employment discrimination claims brought by federal employees against federal defendants; the 90-day limitations period did not begin until plaintiff’s attorney could realistically be held responsible for having access to the Defense Logistics Agency’s Office of Equal Opportunity and Diversity’s final agency decision and learning what the agency had decided. Asuncion v. Hegseth - filed Sept. 4, 2025 Cite as 2025 S.O.S. 23-4044 Full text click here >http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0925//23-4044.

Iloff v. LaPaille - filed Aug. 21, 2025

Employment Law To establish the good faith defense to the default rule that employees who prove minimum wage violations are entitled to liquidated damages, an employer must show that it made a reasonable attempt to determine the requirements of the law governing minimum wages; proof that the employer was ignorant of the law is insufficient. A court may consider a Paid Sick Leave law claim that an employee raises in the context of their employer’s appeal to the superior court of a Labor Commissioner ruling. Iloff v. LaPaille - filed Aug. 21, 2025 Cite as 2025 S.O.S. 2441 Full text click here >http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0825//S275848

Hohenshelt v. Superior Court

Contracts Code of Civil Procedure §1281.98 is not preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act; the statute does not abrogate the longstanding principle that one party’s nonperformance of an obligation automatically extinguishes the other party’s contractual duties only when nonperformance is willful, grossly negligent, or fraudulent. Hohenshelt v. Superior Court (Golden State Foods) - filed Aug. 11, 2025 Cite as 2025 S.O.S. 2269 Full text click here >http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0825//S284498