For reprint rights or to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, email Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com for prices or call 213-229-5424.

To buy more copies, call 866-531-1492 or email subscribe@dailyjournal.com
This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...
You have to be a subscriber to view this page.
Daily appellate reports
Enewsletter Sign-up
    Filter by date
     to 
    Search by Case Name
    Search by Judge
    Search by Case Number
    Search by DJ Citation Number
    Search by Category
    Search by Court
Name Category Published
Dept. of Fair Employment and Housing v. M&N Financing Corporation
Employees who were coerced by their employer to engage in discriminatory conduct were aggrieved parties under the Fair Employment and Housing Act. 		Employment Law 2DCA/5 Sep. 29, 2021
Guzman v. NBA Automotive, Inc.
Employee's Department of Fair Employment and Housing complaint was valid, even though it incorrectly identified employer's legal name, because other complaint information could easily identify employer. 		Employment Law 2DCA/7 Sep. 20, 2021
Medina v. Equilon Enterprises, LLC
An entity can be a joint employer if enough control is exercised over an intermediary entity to indirectly dictate the wages, hours, or working conditions of the employee. 		Employment Law 4DCA/3 Sep. 14, 2021
Warmenhoven v. NetApp, Inc.
Promises made in Powerpoint presentations did not create an ERISA plan and violation of plan administrator's duties under Section 1104(a)(1) does not require a showing of intentional deceit. 		Employment Law 9th Sep. 14, 2021
Wesson v. Staples the Office Superstore, LLC
Trial courts have inherent authority to ensure that PAGA claims will be manageable at trial and may strike unmanageable claims. 		Employment Law 2DCA/4 Sep. 13, 2021
Skidgel v. California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board
In-Home Supportive Services caregivers who provide services to family members are not eligible for unemployment insurance benefits. 		Employment Law CASC Aug. 20, 2021
Hollingsworth v. Heavy Transport, Inc.
Jurisdictional questions regarding workers' compensation coverage are properly decided by court, not jury. 		Employment Law 2DCA/4 Jul. 29, 2021
Pollock v. Tri-Modal Distribution Services, Inc.
Actionable quid pro quo sexual harassment occurs when employees have actual or constructive knowledge of employer's decision to not promote due to harassment. 		Employment Law CASC Jul. 27, 2021
Ferra v. Loews Hollywood Hotel, LLC
Like regular rate of pay, regular rate of compensation includes all nondiscretionary payments, not just hourly wages. 		Employment Law CASC Jul. 16, 2021
Certified Tire & Service Centers Wage & Hour Cases
Where employer pays according to its contract and at least statutory minimum wage, its legal obligation is fulfilled even if pay increases fluctuate based on productivity. 		Employment Law 4DCA/1 Jul. 7, 2021
Levanoff v. Dragas
Employer did not violate California law by using rate-in-effect method for calculating regular rate of pay for purposes of establishing overtime rate of pay for dual rate employees. 		Employment Law 4DCA/3 Jun. 30, 2021
General Atomics v. Superior Court (Green)
Defendant's petition for writ of mandate was granted because its wage statements showed the applicable hourly rates and the total number of hours worked at each. 		Employment Law 4DCA/1 Jun. 2, 2021
Bruni v. The Edward Thomas Hospitality Corporation
Earlier period of employment that ended in voluntary resignation could not be aggregated with later period of employment that ended in layoff to meet six-month minimum period of employment under City's Ordinance. 		Employment Law 2DCA/3 May 19, 2021
Salazar v. See's Candy Shops
Individual issues would predominate in determining whether employer consistently applied practice of denying second meal breaks. 		Employment Law 2DCA/2 May 12, 2021
Rosales v. Uber Technologies, Inc.
A plaintiff cannot be compelled to arbitrate disputes in a PAGA claim because the State was not a party to the arbitration agreement. 		Employment Law 2DCA/8 May 4, 2021
Gomez v. The Regents of the University of California
Wage Order No. 4 does not apply to Regents of the University of California because it is neither a political subdivision nor a listed entity, but a public trust. 		Employment Law 4DCA/1 Apr. 26, 2021
Vendor Surveillance Corporation v. Henning
'Dynamex' 'ABC' test applies in alleged wage order violations and 'Borello' provides applicable standard in assessing unemployment insurance taxes. 		Employment Law 4DCA/1 Mar. 22, 2021
Brown v. Los Angeles Unified School Dist.
Plaintiff adequately pled cause of action for failure to provide reasonable accommodation for her disability. 		Employment Law 2DCA/8 Feb. 22, 2021
Choochagi v. Barracuda Networks, Inc.
Trial court did not err in its application of 'McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green' test to plaintiff's California Family Rights Act claim. 		Employment Law 6DCA Feb. 3, 2021
Kao v. Joy Holiday
Trial court properly ruled that appellants, as alter egos of travel tour company that they owned and operated, were personally liable for respondent's unpaid wages. 		Employment Law 1DCA/3 Dec. 9, 2020
Modification: People v. Uber Technologies, Inc.
Because drivers performed services for defendant rideshare companies in usual course of defendants' businesses, there was reasonable probability of prevailing on drivers' claim that defendants misclassified drivers. 		Employment Law 1DCA/4 Nov. 25, 2020
People v. Superior Court (Cal Cartage Transportation Express, LLC)
Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 does not preempt application of 'ABC' test under 'Dynamex Operations W. v. Superior Court.' 		Employment Law 2DCA/4 Nov. 23, 2020
Lares v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan
Trial court properly granted summary judgment in favor of defendant because defendant did not violate California Family Rights Act. 		Employment Law 2DCA/4 Oct. 27, 2020
People v. Uber Technologies, Inc.
Because drivers performed services for defendant rideshare companies in usual course of defendants' businesses, there was reasonable probability of prevailing on drivers' claim that defendants misclassified drivers. 		Employment Law 1DCA/4 Oct. 26, 2020
Sanchez v. Martinez
Although trial court mistakenly deprived plaintiffs from choosing their preferred course of recovery, plaintiffs were not prejudiced in being forced to take option that maximized their recovery. 		Employment Law 3DCA Sep. 15, 2020
Morgado v. City and County of San Francisco
Employer's monetary obligation to wrongfully terminated employee 'may be mitigated by deducting compensation or benefits actually received by employee that are inconsistent with original employment.' 		Employment Law 1DCA/4 Aug. 28, 2020
Modification: Pasos v. Los Angeles County Civil Service Com.
Trial court erred by substituting its own discretion for that of Sheriff's Department in determining appropriate penalty for deputy sheriff's failure to report another deputy's use of force against inmate. 		Employment Law 2DCA/7 Aug. 20, 2020
Robinson v. Southern Counties Oil Co.
Because present action and another, resolved, class action involved PAGA claims based on same alleged violations of Labor Code, claim preclusion barred relitigation of present claim. 		Employment Law 1DCA/4 Aug. 17, 2020
Pasos v. Los Angeles County Civil Service Com.
Trial court erred by substituting its own discretion for that of Sheriff's Department in determining appropriate penalty for deputy sheriff's failure to report another deputy's use of force against inmate. 		Employment Law 2DCA/7 Jul. 29, 2020
Modification: Gutierrez v. Brand Energy Services of California
Trial court erred in interpreting Wage Order 16 Section 5(D) as permitting employees and employers to enter CBA's that waived right to all compensation for employer-mandated travel time. 		Employment Law 1DCA/3 Jul. 7, 2020
By using our website, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. You can learn more about how we use cookies by reviewing our Privacy Policy here.