This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Labor/Employment

Apr. 28, 2012

Divided by a common language: Brinker vs. Wal-Mart, Pt. 1

Brinker and Wal-Mart illustrate different approaches to appellate review: one rooted in deference, the other reflecting a distrust of lower courts. By Brad Seligman of Lewis, Feinberg, Lee, Renaker & Jackson PC

Administration Building

Brad S. Seligman

Supervising Judge

Civil Direct Calendar


By Brad Seligman


The California Supreme Court's recent decision in Brinker Rest. Corp. v. Superior Ct., Cal.4th, 2012 (Apr. 12, 2012) addressed important substantive questions regarding an employer's obligation to provide meal and rest breaks for its employees. While most of the post decision commentary has focused on these issues, Brinker also discussed important class certification principles applicable to all cla...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?

Sign up for Daily Journal emails