Daily eBriefs - March 26, 2024

Employment Law Employees who prevail in actions to recover unpaid minimum and overtime wages are entitled to their reasonable litigation costs under Labor Code §1194(a), irrespective of the amount recovered. Gramajo v. Joe's Pizza on Sunset - filed March 25, 2024, Second District, Div. Eight Cite as 2024 S.O.S. 1110 Full text click here http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0324//B322697

Daily eBriefs - March 12, 2024

Contracts A plaintiff who worked at a California warehouse facility which received merchandise from mostly international locations belonged to a class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce and was therefore exempted from the Federal Arbitration Act; an employee is not categorically excluded from the transportation worker exemption simply because he performs duties on a purely local basis. Ortiz v. Randstad Inhouse Services - filed March 12, 2024 Cite as 2024 S.O.S. 23-55147 Full text click here >http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0324//23-55147.

Daily eBriefs - March 11, 2024

Intellectual Property An employer was the prevailing party on its trade secret misappropriation claim where a jury found the defendant misappropriated its trade secrets, even though the jury also found that the misappropriation did not cause the employer to suffer damages or the employee to be unjustly enriched. Applied Medical Distribution v. Jarrells - filed March 8, 2024, Third District, Div. Eight Cite as 2024 S.O.S. 958 Full text click here >

NLRB’s Joint-Employer Rule Vacated by U.S. District Judge

NLRB’s Joint-Employer Rule Vacated by U.S. District Judge 03/09/2024 06:12 PM EST March 09, 2024 On Friday evening, U.S. District Judge J. Campbell Barker of the Eastern District of Texas vacated the National Labor Relations Board’s recent rule on determining the standard for joint-employer status and the Board’s rescission of the 2020 joint-employer rule. Judge Barker had previously stayed the joint-employer rule until March 11, 2024. “The District Court’s decision to vacate the Board’s rule is a disappointing setback, but is not the last word on our efforts to return our joint-employer standard to the common law principles that have been endorsed by other courts," said Chairman Lauren McFerran. "The Agency is reviewing the decision and actively considering next steps in this case.”

Daily eBriefs - March 5, 2024

Evidence A district court did not abuse its discretion in granting dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(e)(2) of an employment discrimination action because of intentional spoliation of electronically stored information by the plaintiff where ample circumstantial evidence showed that the plaintiff acted willfully, and the district court properly relied on an inference that her deletion of text messages with co-workers and her coordination with witnesses to delete messages was prejudicial to the defendant. Jones v. Nathanson - filed March 6, 2024 Cite as 2024 S.O.S. 22-16465 Full text click here >http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0324//22-16465