Robles v. Employment Development Department

Assuming the other Code of Civil Procedure §1021.5 criteria are met, a fee award will be appropriate except where the expected value of the litigant’s own monetary award exceeds by a substantial margin the actual litigation costs; the making of new law is not a prerequisite to a fee award under §1021.5.

Robles v. Employment Development Department - filed July 31, 2019, First District, Div. Four 

Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 3708 

For more information, go to: 

http://www.beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com/

L'Chaim House, Inc. v. Div. of Labor Standards Enforcement

Plaintiffs L’Chaim House, Inc. and its owner, Cary Kopstein (collectively, L’Chaim), operate residential care homes for seniors.  L’Chaim was cited for wage and hour violations by defendant Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE).  After an unsuccessful administrative appeal, L’Chaim initiated this action by filing a petition for a writ of administrative mandamus under Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.5, which the trial court denied.

On appeal, L’Chaim claims that under the applicable Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC) wage order, it may require its employees to work “on-duty” meal periods that, unlike periods when employees are “relieved of all duty,” do not need to be at least 30 minutes long.  (IWC wage order No. 5-2001 (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 11050) (hereafter Wage Order No. 5), subd. (11)(A), (E).)  We hold that, to the contrary, L’Chaim must provide meal periods of at least 30 minutes, regardless of whether they are on-duty or off-duty, under Wage Order No. 5 and the applicable statutory law.  We therefore affirm.

For more information, go to: 

http://www.beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com/

West v. City of Caldwell

A homeowner’s lack of consent to the entry of her house was not clearly established under circumstances where the officer threatened to arrest the homeowner for concealing a wanted felon’s whereabouts, but the officer walked away and then returned and again asked for access to the house, and the homeowner nodded assent and handed over her key. As of August 2014, it was not clearly established that officers who thought they had permission to enter a home to apprehend a dangerous, potentially armed, and suicidal felon would exceed the scope of a homeowner’s consent to entry by employing tear gas canisters when they entered the home.

West v. City of Caldwell - filed July 25, 2019 

Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 18-35300 

For more information, go to: 

http://www.beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com/

Newirth v. Aegis Senior Communities, LLC

Under federal law, a party seeking to prove that the right to compel arbitration has been waived must carry the burden of demonstrating knowledge of an existing right to compel arbitration; intentional acts inconsistent with that existing right; and prejudice to the person opposing arbitration from such inconsistent acts.

Newirth v. Aegis Senior Communities, LLC - filed July 24, 2019 

Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 17-17227 

For more information, go to: 

http://www.beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com/

Two male LAPD officers retaliated against for supporting female officer. $8.6M. Los Angeles County.

LAPD male officers who support female's sexual harassment complaints are themselves subjected to retaliation.

For more information, go to: 

http://www.beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com/

Vazquez v. Jan-Pro Franchising Int’l

Defendant-Appellee’s Petition for Panel Rehearing (Dkt. 93) is GRANTED. The opinion in the above-captioned matter filed on May 2, 2019, and published at 923 F.3d 575, is WITHDRAWN.

A revised disposition and an order certifying to the California Supreme Court the question of whether Dynamex Ops. W. Inc. v. Superior Court, 416 P.3d 1 (Cal. 2018), applies retroactively will be filed in due course.

For more information, go to:

http://www.beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com/ 

Wilson v. Cable News Network, Inc.

The anti-SLAPP statute can be used to screen claims alleging discriminatory or retaliatory employment actions; in such cases, the plaintiff’s allegations about the defendant’s invidious motives will not shield the claim from the same preliminary screening for minimal merit that would apply to any other claim arising from protected activity. The anti-SLAPP statute cannot apply to a defamation claim based on privately communicated remarks that were not made in connection with any issue of public significance.

Wilson v. Cable News Network, Inc. - filed July 22, 2019 

Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 3475 

For more information, go to:
http://www.beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com/