Posts from August 2024.
Severing Unconscionable Terms in Employment Arbitration Agreements  | By: Jared W. Slater 

In August 2000, the California Supreme Court handed down a landmark ruling that changed the face of employment arbitration agreements going forward.  That case, known as Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc., clarified the standards of “procedural” and “substantive” unconscionability in these agreements.  While Armendariz is commonly cited for its holdings on these different types of unconscionability, a lesser aspect of the holding, which was largely unremarked upon for nearly 25 years, dealt with the issue of severing unconscionable ...

Can You Collaterally Attack a Receiver’s Appointment?

Q: I am a receiver for a partnership. I was appointed pursuant to a stipulation between the current partners and a secured creditor. After an extensive investigation, I have sued the former managing partner and her mother to recover fraudulent transfers, for breach of fiduciary duty and for usurping partnership opportunities. They are contending, in defense, that I cannot maintain my lawsuit because my appointment is not valid, because the current partners, having purportedly wrongfully removed the former managing partner, had no right to stipulate to my appointment. Can they ...

Overbroad Employment Arbitration Agreements Will Not Be Enforced in California | By: Jared W. Slater 

Arbitration agreements, at their core, are contracts. As with any contract, there must be “mutuality” or, more colloquially, a “meeting of the minds” on what the contract is intended to encompass. For this reason, employment arbitration agreements are typically limited in scope and drafted to cover only claims or causes of action arising from or related to the relationship between the employee and employer.

 A recent case involving the University of Southern California illustrates the importance of careful drafting. An issue in Cook v. University of Southern California

Posted in Legal Bites
LA Al Fresco Deadline Extended | By: Pooja S. Nair 

On Tuesday, July 30, 2024, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass announced that the deadline for restaurant owners to apply for the city’s permanent Al Fresco program has been extended to December 31, 2024. This means that any restaurants with temporary authorization may continue to offer outdoor dining. The LA Al Fresco program is a popular initiative that came out of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Restaurants were able to apply for temporary authorizations to enable them to use sidewalks and street space for outdoor dining.

The city had previously announced that Al Fresco Temporary ...

Subscribe

Recent Posts

Blogs

Contributors

Archives

Jump to PageX

ECJ uses cookies to enhance your experience on our website, to better understand how our website is used and to help provide security. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies. For more information see our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.