Just Don’t Go There: The Ninth Circuit Rules that Prior Pay History Can’t Be Used To Justify Compensation Decisions
3/10/20
By: Anastasia Osbrink For years, employers across the U.S. have taken into account what an individual was making at his or her current job in assessing how much they would need to pay them if they left and joined the employer. And, for years, when one employee claimed discrimination based upon sex under the federal…
Securing the Bag: California Supreme Court Rules Exit Searches Compensable
3/2/20
By: Gregory Blueford Shunning the position of the United State Supreme Court’s decision in Busk v. Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc., the California Supreme Court has ruled that time spent on the employer’s premises waiting for and undergoing company-mandated exit searches of bags and personal technology devices brought to work purely for personal convenience by employees…
Pre-Judgment Settlements with the Insured after Claimed Blown Policy Limit Demand
2/20/20
By: Tim Kenna Every once in a while, an insurer contemplates settlement of the insured’s potential bad faith claim following allegations that a policy limit demand lapsed, and that the insurer is liable for any resulting excess judgment and bad faith damages. In Potter v. Alliance United Insurance Company, 37 Cal. App 5th 894 (2019),…
States are Busy on the Cyber Front
2/19/20
By: Amy C. Bender 2020 is off to a busy start, with several states taking action on cybersecurity legislation and issuing other legal updates. Highlights include: California – California’s Attorney General has issued revised proposed regulations regarding the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”), which creates consumer rights relating to the access to, deletion of, and…
Tips on Dealing With Pro Per Parties In California
1/15/20
By: Greg Fayard At some point in their career, lawyers deal with the unrepresented—or pro pers. In California, there’s now an ethical rule that governs how to fairly and properly engage with opposing parties who do not have lawyers. Rule 4.3 of the Rules of Professional Conduct for California lawyers says a lawyer cannot tell…
AB5: California’s Controversial Gig-Work Law Took Effect January 1, 2020
1/7/20
By: Margot Parker As of January 1, 2020, California’s AB5 may require employers to reclassify hundreds of thousands of independent contractors as employees with broad labor law protections. The new law codifies the “ABC test” adopted by the California Supreme Court in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles in 2018. Under…
Federal Court Temporarily Enjoins California’s Ban On Mandatory Arbitration Agreements
1/7/20
By: Brad Adler Employers will recall that California passed a law in October, 2019 (AB 51) that would limit the ability of employers to require mandatory arbitration of certain statutory employment claims as of January 1, 2020. Specifically, AB 51 provided that employers could no longer require, as a condition of employment, that a job applicant…
California Lawyers Should Not Lie
12/20/19
By: Greg Fayard It seems obvious, but lawyers shouldn’t lie. A new Rule of Professional Conduct applicable to California lawyers says that while representing a client, a lawyer shall not knowingly make a false statement of material fact or law to a third person. Rule 4.1 is aimed at lawyers communicating with opposing counsel or…
Changes In Store for California HOA Elections
11/18/19
By: Nicole Clowdsley With 2020 fast approaching, California HOAs should be proactively preparing to comply with a litany of new statutorily mandated changes to their election processes. On October 12, 2019, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 323 into law resulting in amendments to multiple sections of the California Civil Code regulations governing HOA…
California Lawyers Cannot Churn Files
11/7/19
By: Greg Fayard Under the Rules of Professional Conduct applicable to California lawyers, attorneys are not supposed to do things where the substantial purpose is to delay, prolong, or cause needless expense. Under Rule 3.2, lawyers can be disciplined for churning a file for the substantial purpose of increasing legal fees. Examples of needless work…
What You Don’t Know Can Hurt You: The Enforceability of Long-Term Leak Exclusions
10/24/19
By: Anastasia Osbrink My family and I recently arrived home one evening to discover our laminate floors warm to the touch and pushing up at the seams. A friend who was visiting asked if we had heated floors. Heated floors? Not in Southern California. What I was experiencing first-hand was a water pipe leak under…
California Lawyers Now Have A Duty of Diligence
9/13/19
By: Greg Fayard The prior rules of professional conduct for California lawyers required them to be competent but were silent on also being “diligent.” Under the latest version of the rules, California lawyers now have an express duty of diligence. (Rule 1.3) That is, California lawyers can now be disciplined by the State Bar for…