Live events are part and parcel of California’s landscape.  From Coachella to county fairs, thousands of workers each year participate in setting up and tearing down the infrastructure at these public event venues.  Widely reported tragedies related to this work in years’ past, combined with the temporary nature of these entertainment events, have prompted the California legislature to promulgate additional protections for this class of workers through the recently enacted Assembly Bill 2738.

Effective immediately, as part of the contract for production of any live event at ...

California has a habit of finding creative ways to protect employees from potential instances of discrimination or retaliation, no matter how remote.  Senate Bill 399, pointedly titled the “California Worker Freedom from Employer Intimidation Act” (“SB 399”), furthers this tradition by prohibiting employers from subjecting an employee to, or threatening an employee with, discharge, discrimination, or retaliation because the employee declines to attend a mandatory employer-sponsored meeting or otherwise refuses to listen to the employer’s communications ...

Governor Newsom recently signed an amendment to the CROWN Act (which stands for “Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair”) extending the Act’s reach.  Specifically, the amendment, Assembly Bill 1815, makes two key changes.  First, it amends the Unruh Civil Rights Act to now include the CROWN Act.  Second, it amends key definitions in the CROWN Act to eliminate prior ambiguities.

Originally enacted in 2019, the CROWN Act is intended to prevent discrimination based on natural and protective hairstyles associated with race in the workplace and public schools.  ...

Over the last several years, California employers have become increasingly aware of cities and counties enacting workplace requirements on a wide range of issues, including scheduling, lay offs, paid sick leave, minimum wages, and other more industry-specific requirements.  Next year that list is likely to become even more expansive with the addition of laws on discrimination. 

Specifically, effective January 1, 2025, Senate Bill 1340 permits any city, county, or other political subdivision of the state to enforce a local law prohibiting discrimination in employment against ...

Lawyers love obscure rules about giving three-day notices—the kind that California landlords hate. The decision in City of Alameda v. Sheehan, published September 13, 2024, teaches that there is a wrong way to issue a notice to pay rent or quit to a delinquent tenant.

In Sheehan, tenant Shelby Sheehan had stopped paying rent for 17 months. The landlord, City of Alameda, had enough. The City directed its property manager, RiverRock Real Estate Group, Inc. to get the tenant current or to evict. The manager served a three-day notice to pay rent or quit that advised the tenant to deliver ...

Beginning July 23, 2024, California's Indoor Heat Illness Prevention regulations apply to most indoor workplaces.  Among other things, the regulations require that employers implement certain indoor heat illness prevention measures when the indoor temperature reaches certain benchmark levels.  Additionally, employers must develop and implement a written indoor heat illness prevention plan (IHIPP) in the language understood by the majority of workers.

Required heat illness prevention measures must be implemented in most cases when indoor temperatures reach 82°F to ...

On September 22, 2024, Governor Newsom signed Senate Bill (“SB”) 1053, which prohibits grocery stores from offering single-use plastic carry out bags for sale. Instead, stores must offer only paper bags.

Beginning on January 1, 2026, stores may not offer single-use plastic carry out bags for the purpose of carrying purchased goods, with limited exceptions. Only “recycled paper bags,” would be permitted. Beginning on January 1, 2028, recycled paper bags must be made from a minimum of 50% postconsumer recycled materials.

The legislation targeted a perceived loophole in ...

The FTC’s effort to implement a nationwide ban on the use of most non-compete agreements has been stalled indefinitely following a recent court ruling by a district court judge in Texas.  Specifically, in Ryan, LLC v. FTC, U.S. District Judge Ada Brown issued a ruling blocking the FTC’s final rule from going into effect, finding that the FTC “lack[ed] statutory authority to promulgate the Non-Compete Rule” and noting that the FTC’s rule was “arbitrary and capricious” as the FTC failed to provide a reasonable explanation to justify the breadth of the rule.

Originally ...

Q: I have a client who owes money to the IRS. While I know the IRS likely has a tax lien, my understanding was it just waits until a taxpayer’s property is sold and then gets paid out of escrow. Instead, here, the IRS has filed suit and is asking the court to appoint a receiver to take my client’s property and sell it. I thought receivers can’t be appointed if there is an adequate remedy at law, which would be the case here, since the IRS could get a judgement for what it contends it is owed and then attempt to collect on its money judgment. The US Attorney on the case disputes this, saying the IRS ...

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 ...