49 Cited authorities

McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green
411 U.S. 792 (1973) Cited 53,093 times 96 Legal Analyses
Holding in employment discrimination case that statistical evidence of employer's general policy and practice may be relevant circumstantial evidence of discriminatory intent behind individual employment decision
Auer v. Robbins
519 U.S. 452 (1997) Cited 2,375 times 100 Legal Analyses
Holding that a federal agency's interpretation of a regulation is controlling where it is not "plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation"
Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co.
25 Cal.4th 826 (Cal. 2001) Cited 4,948 times 2 Legal Analyses
Concluding that the gathering and dissemination of pricing information by the petroleum companies through an independent industry service did not imply collusive action where there was no evidence the information was misused as a basis for an unlawful conspiracy; rather, evidence suggested that individual companies used all available resources “to determine capacity, supply, and pricing decisions which would maximize their own individual profits”
Guz v. Bechtel National, Inc.
24 Cal.4th 317 (Cal. 2000) Cited 3,301 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that an implied covenant "cannot be endowed with an existence independent of its contractual underpinnings. It cannot impose substantive duties or limits on the contracting parties beyond those incorporated in the specific terms of their agreement."
Shroyer v. New Cingular Wireless Services
622 F.3d 1035 (9th Cir. 2010) Cited 1,448 times
Holding that fraud claims were pled with particularity when the allegations concerned a "relatively definite time frame" identifiable by discrete events, even though exact dates were not provided
Myers v. Hertz Corp.
624 F.3d 537 (2d Cir. 2010) Cited 1,261 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that district courts have the discretion to certify a collective action by facilitating notice to potential plaintiffs of the "pendency of the action and of their opportunity to opt-in as represented plaintiffs"
Brinker Rest. Corp. v. Superior Court of San Diego Cnty.
53 Cal.4th 1004 (Cal. 2012) Cited 819 times 83 Legal Analyses
Holding the employer is required to provide a meal period to employees, but "is not obligated to police meal breaks and ensure no work thereafter is performed"
Morgan v. Regents of University of California
88 Cal.App.4th 52 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000) Cited 652 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding plaintiff "must obtain from the [DFEH] a notice of right to sue in order to be entitled to file a civil action in court based on violations of FEHA"
Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co.
27 Cal.3d 167 (Cal. 1980) Cited 840 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that at-will employees may recover tort damages from employers if they can show they were discharged in contravention of fundamental public policy
Green v. State
42 Cal.4th 254 (Cal. 2007) Cited 296 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the FEHA protects only employees with a disability who can perform the essential duties of the job with reasonable accommodation
Section 216 - Penalties
29 U.S.C. § 216 Cited 16,781 times 143 Legal Analyses
Holding employers liable for “unpaid minimum wages, or their unpaid overtime compensation”
Section 207 - Maximum hours
29 U.S.C. § 207 Cited 10,749 times 231 Legal Analyses
Establishing overtime rules
Section 213 - Exemptions
29 U.S.C. § 213 Cited 4,694 times 257 Legal Analyses
Exempting from provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act "any employee employed on a casual basis in domestic service employment to provide companionship services for individuals who (because of age or infirmity) are unable to care for themselves (as such terms are defined and delimited by regulations of the Secretary)"
Section 541.700 - Primary duty
29 C.F.R. § 541.700 Cited 793 times 60 Legal Analyses
Providing that determining an employee's "primary duty" requires analysis of "all the facts in a particular case," looking to the "principal, main, major or most important duty that the employee performs"
Section 541.602 - Salary basis
29 C.F.R. § 541.602 Cited 413 times 145 Legal Analyses
Focusing on whether "the employee regularly receives" a "predetermined amount" each relevant pay period
Section 13520 - Definition of "Willful."
Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 13520 Cited 123 times 2 Legal Analyses
Providing that "a good faith dispute that any wages are due will preclude imposition of waiting time penalties under Section 203"
Section 11010 - Order Regulating Wages, Hours, and Working Conditions in the Manufacturing Industry
Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 11010 Cited 120 times 4 Legal Analyses
Requiring employers to pay to each employee "not less than the applicable minimum wage for all hours worked in the payroll period"
Section 11068 - Reasonable Accommodation
Cal. Code Regs. tit. 2 § 11068 Cited 82 times 1 Legal Analyses
Granting or extending a leave may be a reasonable accommodation "provided that the leave is likely to be effective in allowing the employee to return to work at the end of the leave ...."
Section 11065 - Definitions
Cal. Code Regs. tit. 2 § 11065 Cited 71 times 7 Legal Analyses
Defining essential and marginal functions

Order After Hearing POS

49 Cited authorities

Holding in employment discrimination case that statistical evidence of employer's general policy and practice may be relevant circumstantial evidence of discriminatory intent behind individual employment decision

Holding that a federal agency's interpretation of a regulation is controlling where it is not "plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation"

Holding that an implied covenant "cannot be endowed with an existence independent of its contractual underpinnings. It cannot impose substantive duties or limits on the contracting parties beyond those incorporated in the specific terms of their agreement."

Holding that fraud claims were pled with particularity when the allegations concerned a "relatively definite time frame" identifiable by discrete events, even though exact dates were not provided

Holding that district courts have the discretion to certify a collective action by facilitating notice to potential plaintiffs of the "pendency of the action and of their opportunity to opt-in as represented plaintiffs"

Holding the employer is required to provide a meal period to employees, but "is not obligated to police meal breaks and ensure no work thereafter is performed"

Holding plaintiff "must obtain from the [DFEH] a notice of right to sue in order to be entitled to file a civil action in court based on violations of FEHA"

Holding that at-will employees may recover tort damages from employers if they can show they were discharged in contravention of fundamental public policy

Holding that the FEHA protects only employees with a disability who can perform the essential duties of the job with reasonable accommodation

Holding employers liable for “unpaid minimum wages, or their unpaid overtime compensation”

Establishing overtime rules

Providing that determining an employee's "primary duty" requires analysis of "all the facts in a particular case," looking to the "principal, main, major or most important duty that the employee performs"

Focusing on whether "the employee regularly receives" a "predetermined amount" each relevant pay period

Providing that "a good faith dispute that any wages are due will preclude imposition of waiting time penalties under Section 203"

Requiring employers to pay to each employee "not less than the applicable minimum wage for all hours worked in the payroll period"

Granting or extending a leave may be a reasonable accommodation "provided that the leave is likely to be effective in allowing the employee to return to work at the end of the leave ...."

Defining essential and marginal functions