For reprint rights or to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, email Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com for prices or call 213-229-5424.

To buy more copies, call 866-531-1492 or email subscribe@dailyjournal.com
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...
You have to be a subscriber to view this page.
Daily appellate reports
Enewsletter Sign-up
    Filter by date
     to 
    Search by Case Name
    Search by Judge
    Search by Case Number
    Search by DJ Citation Number
    Search by Category
    Search by Court
Name Category Published
Acosta v. Brain
Trial court did not err in concluding that an employee's participation in a Department of Labor investigation is a protected activity under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). 		Employment Law 9th Dec. 5, 2018
Hernandez v. Pacific Bell Telephone Co.
Employee is not subject to the employer's control within the definition of 'hours worked' for purposes of compensation while voluntarily using employer provided transportation. 		Employment Law California Courts of Appeal Nov. 19, 2018
Modification: Garcia v. Border Transportation Group, LLC
Summary adjudication was improper as to plaintiff's wage order claims; under 'ABC test,' defendants failed to present evidence to show that plaintiff provided services for other entities 'independently.' 		Employment Law 4DCA/1 Nov. 15, 2018
Manavian v. Dept. of Justice
Protections under the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act do not apply to the termination of career executive assignment positions as a matter of law. 		Employment Law 3DCA Nov. 9, 2018
AMN Healthcare, Inc. v. Aya Healthcare Services, Inc.
Trial court properly granted summary judgment against competitor employer's seeking to restrain former employs via a non-compete agreement against public policy and Business & Professions Code. 		Employment Law 4DCA/1 Nov. 5, 2018
Garcia v. Border Transportation Group, LLC
Summary adjudication was improper as to plaintiff's wage order claims; under 'ABC test,' defendants failed to present evidence to show that plaintiff provided services for other entities 'independently.' 		Employment Law 4DCA/1 Oct. 23, 2018
San Francisco Police Officers' Assn. v. San Francisco Police Com.
A use of force policy is as closely akin to a managerial decision as any decision can be in running a police department 		Employment Law 1DCA/2 Sep. 28, 2018
American Airlines v. Mawhinney
Department of Labor independent investigations do not subject the investigated party to the waiver of any arbitration right it has in regards to the claims being investigated 		Employment Law 9th Sep. 27, 2018
Sumner v. Simpson University
The ministerial exception does not bar breach of contract claims so long as such claims do not require a review of the employee's religious qualifications or performance. 		Employment Law 3DCA Sep. 26, 2018
Modification: Lacagnina v. Comprehend Systems, Inc.
An 'at will' provision in an employment contract does not mean an employer can avoid tort liability for fraudulent inducement of contract based on the contract's inclusion of said provision. 		Employment Law 1DCA/4 Aug. 16, 2018
Lacagnina v. Comprehend Systems, Inc.
An 'at will' provision in an employment contract does not mean an employer can avoid tort liability for fraudulent inducement of contract based on the contract's inclusion of said provision. 		Employment Law 1DCA/4 Aug. 7, 2018
Nishiki v. Danko Meredith, APC
Attorney fee award affirmed where award makes employee successful party on appeal in superior court despite failing on some claims under Labor Code Section 98.2. 		Employment Law 1DCA/4 Aug. 3, 2018
Golden v. California Emergency Physicians Medical Group
Settlement agreement reversed where it violated Business & Professions Code Section 16600 by placing a substantial restriction on the doctor's ability to practice medicine. 		Employment Law 9th Jul. 25, 2018
Rodriguez v. Taco Bell
Judgment affirmed where restaurant that gives employees option to purchase discounted meals on meal break, if those employees eat in restaurant, relieves employees of duty and relinquishes control over employees’ activities. 		Employment Law 9th Jul. 19, 2018
Caldera v. Dept. of Corrections & Rehabilitation
A trial court properly found that there was substantial evidence to support a jury's finding that harassment in an employment setting was severe and pervasive. 		Employment Law 4DCA/3 Jul. 11, 2018
Morales v. 22nd District Agricultural Assn.
A trial court did not err by granting a state employer's MSJ where seasonal employees of an amusement facility who claimed entitlement to overtime compensation were not eligible due to the amusement exception. 		Employment Law 4DCA/1 Jul. 11, 2018
Juarez v. Wash Depot Holdings
A trial court properly concluded that a PAGA waiver outlined in an employee handbook was unenforceable as against public policy, where clauses in English and Spanish version conflicted. 		Employment Law 2DCA/6 Jul. 6, 2018
AHMC Healthcare, Inc. v. Superior Court
So long as employer timekeeping system uses rounding in way that does not 'systematically' undercount employee time worked, does not violate California wage laws. 		Employment Law 2DCA/4 Jun. 28, 2018
Meeks v. Autozone, Inc.
A trial court abused its discretion as to the admissability of evidence where a plaintiff in a sexual harassment case had not saved the offensive texts messages allegedly sent by her harasser, and could only testify about her recollection of said evidence. 		Employment Law 4DCA/2 Jun. 27, 2018
Newland v. County of Los Angeles
Vehicle use exception to 'going and coming' rule is inapplicable where employer does not require employee to bring personal vehicle to work, and does not benefit from employee's trip with personal vehicle. 		Employment Law 2DCA/5 Jun. 20, 2018
Canales v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Summary judgment in favor of employer affirmed where employer that furnishes employee’s wage statements before Section 226 (a)’s ‘semimonthly deadline’ complies with statute. 		Employment Law 2DCA/5 Jun. 4, 2018
Shine v. Williams-Sonoma
Sustained demurrer on res judicata grounds affirmed where issue preclusion applies to prior action that was dismissed with prejudice pursuant to settlement agreement. 		Employment Law 2DCA/4 May 31, 2018
Modification: Curry v. Equilon Enterprises, LLC
Employees of entities who leased and operated gas stations owned by an oil company were not de facto employees of the oil company because there was no employer vis a vis employee relationship. 		Employment Law 4DCA/2 May 21, 2018
Snapp v. BNSF Railway
Court’s characterization of employee’s burden as burden of proof rather than burden of production affirmed under ‘Dark v. Curry County.’ 		Employment Law 9th May 14, 2018
Palm v. Los Angeles Dept. of Water and Power
Los Angeles City Employees do not have a vested protected interest if they are employed in a probationary position and therefore if they are dismissed, cannot claim due process violation. 		Employment Law 9th May 11, 2018
Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court
Suffer or permit to work standard under ‘Martinez v. Combs’ applies to determine whether worker is properly classified as independent contractor or employee. 		Employment Law 2DCA/7 May 1, 2018
Curry v. Equilon Enterprises, LLC
Employees of entities who leased and operated gas stations owned by an oil company were not de facto employees of the oil company because there was no employer vis a vis employee relationship. 		Employment Law 4DCA/2 Apr. 30, 2018
Scott v. Gino Morena Enterprises
Claims brought under Title VII of Civil Rights Act of 1964 are not untimely where 90-day time period to file suit begins to run when EEOC issues right-to-sue notice. 		Employment Law 9th Apr. 30, 2018
Tanguilig v. Neiman Marcus Group, Inc.
Trial court did not err by dismissing matter with 5-year bar despite plaintiff's claim that matter was tolled while co-plaintiff was in arbitration. 		Employment Law 1DCA/4 Apr. 18, 2018
Rizo v. Yovino
Employee's prior salary does not constitute 'factor other than sex' upon which wage differential may be based, under Equal Pay Act. 		Employment Law 9th Apr. 10, 2018
By using our website, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. You can learn more about how we use cookies by reviewing our Privacy Policy here.