§Why CasetextPricing

Declaration

undefined

49 Cited authorities

  1. Alcantar v. Hobart Serv.

    800 F.3d 1047 (9th Cir. 2015)   Cited 116 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Finding California's exhaustion requirements not satisfied where a plaintiff's allegations were so vague they did not allow the state agency to "intelligently assess the seriousness of the alleged violations" and the employer to "determine what policies or practices are being complained of"

  2. Armenta v. Osmose, Inc.

    135 Cal.App.4th 314 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 138 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding employees were entitled to at least a minimum hourly wage for uncompensated time spent traveling, loading equipment and supplies, doing paperwork, and maintaining company vehicles

  3. Bufil v. Dollar Financial Group, Inc.

    162 Cal.App.4th 1193 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 91 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the claim of a distinct subclass cannot be precluded by collateral estoppel

  4. Gonzalez v. Downtown LA Motors, LP

    215 Cal.App.4th 36 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 65 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that automotive service technicians paid under a piece-rate plan for repair work are also entitled to separate hourly compensation for non-productive time directed by the employer during their work shifts because California law does not allow an employer to average total compensation over total hours worked in a pay period

  5. Reyes v. Macy's, Inc.

    202 Cal.App.4th 1119 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011)   Cited 59 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a PAGA claimant may not bring an individual PAGA claim

  6. Bluford v. Safeway Stores, Inc.

    216 Cal.App.4th 864 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 52 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Interpreting similar language in Wage Order Nos. 7 and 9, Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8, §§ 11070; 11090

  7. Kullar v. Foot Locker Retail, Inc.

    168 Cal.App.4th 116 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 52 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In Kullar, there was "nothing" before the court to establish the sufficiency of the investigation other than an assurance from class counsel that "they had seen what they needed to see."

  8. Vaquero v. Stoneledge Furniture LLC

    9 Cal.App.5th 98 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017)   Cited 27 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding "that such compensation plans must separately account and pay for rest periods to comply with California law"

  9. Kullar v. Foot Locker Retail, Inc.

    191 Cal.App.4th 1201 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011)   Cited 13 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Kullar v. Foot Locker Retail, Inc., supra, 191 Cal.App.4th 1201 (Kullar), the Court of Appeal noted that because no class had been certified, "no attorney-client relationship has yet arisen between [the law firm representing the named plaintiff] and the members of the putative class."

  10. Oliver v. Konica Minolta Bus. Sols. U.S.A.

    51 Cal.App.5th 1 (Cal. Ct. App. 2020)   Cited 3 times

    H045069 06-02-2020 Michael OLIVER et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. KONICA MINOLTA BUSINESS SOLUTIONS U.S.A., INC., Defendant and Respondent. Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Appellants: Michael Oliver et al., Robin Workman, Rachel E. Davey, Workman Maw Firm, PC, San Francisco. Attorneys for Defendant and Respondent: Konica Minolta Business Solutions U.S.A., Inc., Eric Edward Hill, San Francisco, Loren Gesinsky, New York, NY, Eden Anderson, San Francisco, Seyfarth Shaw LLP. Bamattre-Manoukian, J

  11. Section 1001 - Congressional findings and declaration of policy

    29 U.S.C. § 1001   Cited 20,656 times   59 Legal Analyses
    Noting that ERISA was enacted “to protect ... employee benefit plans and their beneficiaries”

  12. Section 17200 - Unfair competition defined

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200   Cited 18,122 times   315 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting unlawful business practices

  13. Section 226 - Itemized statement of wages

    Cal. Lab. Code § 226   Cited 2,295 times   127 Legal Analyses
    Providing only statutory penalties

  14. Section 12900 - Short title

    Cal. Gov. Code § 12900   Cited 2,291 times   9 Legal Analyses

    This part may be known and referred to as the "California Fair Employment and Housing Act." Ca. Gov. Code § 12900 Amended by Stats 2022 ch 48 (SB 189),s 29, eff. 6/30/2022(amended Part heading). Added by Stats. 1980, Ch. 992.

  15. Section 201 - Computation and payment of wages upon discharge

    Cal. Lab. Code § 201   Cited 1,790 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Providing that, "[i]f an employer discharges an employee, the wages earned and unpaid at the time of discharge are due and payable immediately"

  16. Section 1194 - Recovery by employee in civil action regardless of agreement to receive lesser wage

    Cal. Lab. Code § 1194   Cited 1,791 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Authorizing an employee receiving less than the legal overtime compensation to recover the unpaid balance, interest, attorney's fees, and costs of suit in a civil action

  17. Section 203 - Failure to pay; penalties

    Cal. Lab. Code § 203   Cited 1,660 times   25 Legal Analyses
    Providing that any willfully unpaid wages "shall continue as a penalty from the due date thereof at the same rate until paid or until an action therefor is commenced"

  18. Section 510 - Eight hour workday; compensation for overtime

    Cal. Lab. Code § 510   Cited 1,627 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Requiring employers to pay 1.5 times the "regular rate of pay" for overtime

  19. Section 1542 - Claims not known by creditor at time of executing release

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1542   Cited 1,641 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Providing that a general release does not extend to unknown claims

  20. Section 2698 - Title of part

    Cal. Lab. Code § 2698   Cited 1,604 times   36 Legal Analyses

    This part shall be known and may be cited as the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004. Ca. Lab. Code § 2698 Added by Stats 2003 ch 906 (SB 796), s 2, eff. 1/1/2004.