RRB Law Blog

Entitlement to Equitable Subrogation Does Not Transform Legal Claims Against Third Parties into Equitable Claims

in Insurance Law by Stephen L. Raucher

In Michael Berg et al., v. Pulte Home Corp. (“Berg”), the Third District Court of Appeal analyzed the question of whether an entitlement to equitable subrogation, as opposed to the underlying action itself, determines the right to a jury trial. … more

A Plaintiff Cannot be Compelled to Arbitrate the Threshold Question of Employee Status in a PAGA Claim

in Employment Law by Timothy D. Reuben

In Damaris Rosales v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (May 4, 2021) 2021 DJDAR 4243, the Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, clarified that a plaintiff asserting a claim for civil penalties under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 … more

21-Day Safe Harbor Provision Does Not Apply to Fee Request in Opposing Frivolous Anti-SLAPP Motion

in Civil Litigation by Stephen L. Raucher

In Changsha Metro Grp. Co., Ltd. v. Xufeng, 57 Cal. App. 5th 1 (2020), the Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, clarified that the “safe harbor” provision of Code of Civil Procedure Section 128.5 does not apply where attorney’s fees … more

Job Applicants Cannot Bring Common Law Tort Actions Against Prospective Employers for “Tameny” Discrimination

in Employment Law by Timothy D. Reuben

The Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, recently clarified that a common law tort action under Tameny for employer conduct in violation of public policy requires an employment relationship.  In Williams v. Sacramento River Cats Baseball Club, LLC, 40 Cal. … more

Court of Appeal Affirms Jury Verdict Because Plaintiffs Presented Prima Facie Case of Whistleblower Retaliation

in Employment Law by Timothy D. Reuben

The Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, recently issued an opinion illustrating the burden of proof in a whistleblower retaliation case.  In Hawkins v. City of L.A., 40 Cal. App. 5th 384 (2019), the court affirmed a jury verdict for … more

Good News and Bad News for Insurance Company Attorneys

in Insurance Law by Stephen L. Raucher

The recent appellate case Strawn v. Morris, Polich & Purdy LLP, 30 Cal. App. 5th 1087 (2019), examined an insurance company attorney’s potential liability in the context of the litigation privilege and elder abuse claims, resulting in a mixed ruling. … more

Garcia v. Border Transportation Group: Two Standards, One Issue

in Employment Law by Timothy D. Reuben

The Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, recently issued an opinion clarifying the appropriate test for whether or not a person is an “employee” or an “independent contractor” in the context of a wage order claim.  In Garcia v. Border … more

Recent Developments in Family Law: Stock Options Must Be Considered Income

in Family Law by Stephanie I. Blum Blog Bio Image

It is well-established under California family law that stock options granted as part of a parent’s employment compensation constitute “income” under Family Code Section 4058(a) and must be used to calculate support.  Until In re Marriage of Macilwaine, 26 Cal. … more

Fire Insurance Claim Pointers

in Insurance Law by Stephen L. Raucher

In light of the terrible fires plaguing California, policyholders should keep in mind some basic principles should they find themselves needing to make a claim, or even if they just want to re-evaluate their property insurance policies. Many of these … more

9th Circuit Holds Prior Salaries Can Not Be Basis For Pay Differentials Between Male and Female Employees

in Employment Law by Timothy D. Reuben

The 9th Circuit decided in Rizo v. Yovino, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 8882, that prior salaries are not “factors other than sex” to justify a pay differential between men and women. In Rizo v. Yovino, The Court, en banc, addressed … more

Court of Appeal Finds Employer Not Vicariously Liable For Co-Employer’s Meal Break Violations

in Employment Law by Timothy D. Reuben

The Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, recently issued an opinion clarifying the extent of the duty an employer owes to ensure its employees take their meal breaks. In Serrano v. Aerotek, Inc. (Mar. 9, 2018, No. A149187) ___Cal.App.5th___ [2018 … more

Sanctions Under Section 128.5 Must Comply With 21-Day Safe Harbor Provision

in Civil Litigation by Stephen L. Raucher

In Nutrition Distribution, LLC v. Southern SARMs, Inc. (2018) 2018 Cal. App. LEXIS 81, the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division 7, was asked to interpret Code of Civil Procedure Section 128.5(f), which governs the procedure applicable to … more

Plaintiff Asserting Claim Under Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) Must Provide Adequate Notice And May Not Proceed Individually

in Employment Law by Timothy D. Reuben

The Court of Appeal, Second District, recently clarified what constitutes adequate notice to the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) in order to assert a PAGA claim. In Khan v. Dunn-Edwards Corp. (2018) 19 Cal.App.5th 804, plaintiff brought a … more

Court of Appeal: Trial Court Appropriately Exercised Discretion Denying Plaintiff’s Attorney Fees

in Employment Law by Timothy D. Reuben

Coming out of the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Two, the Court of Appeal determined in Bustos v. Global P.E.T., Inc. (Dec. 22, 2017, No. E065869) 2017 Cal. App. LEXIS 1168, that the trial court appropriately exercised … more

Recent Developments in Family Law: Evidence Code Section 622 Can’t Be Used to Circumvent the Requirements of Family Code Section 1615

in Family Law by Stephanie I. Blum Blog Bio Image

In In re Marriage of Clarke & Akel (2018) 2018 Cal.App. LEXIS 57, the First Appellate District, Division Five, confronted a potential conflict between Family Code Section 1615 and Evidence Code Section 622. Family Code Section 1615(c)(2) states that a … more