I have received a few questions from employers about the recent California Supreme Court decision in McGill v. Citibank, N.A..  The McGill case isn’t an employment law case, but rather deals with a consumer class action.  In McGill, the California Supreme Court held that an arbitration provision that attempted to entirely waive an individual’s right to seek public injunctive relief (pursuant to the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA), unfair competition law (UCL), and false advertising law) is unenforceable. In so holding, the Court noted that CLRA expressly declares that the ...

QUESTION: I was appointed receiver for an apartment building. I operated the property for six months, then the defendant filed bankruptcy. I filed a claim, as a superseded custodian, under 11 U.S.C. § 543. The debtor objected to my fees and made various other crazy objections. I had to hire counsel to defend my fees and to deal with all the objections. Debtor’s counsel now claims my counsel and I are not entitled to be paid for having to defend my fee request. Is that correct?

ANSWER: The Supreme Court has held that fees incurred in defending fee applications in bankruptcy cases are not ...

Effective January 1, 2017, Assembly Bill 2532 eliminates the requirement that private employers contracting with state and local government agencies to provide specified employment services verify an individual’s legal status or authorization to work prior to providing services to that individual, as required by federal procedures.  AB 2532 also repeals posting requirements that notices be placed in prominent locations stating that only persons authorized to work in the United States be permitted to use the agency’s or the organization’s employment services. 

This ...