San Francisco Office
publications
LawFlash/Client Alert | Labor and Employment LawFlash
Labor and Employment Practice
Latest update from the DLSE answers many employer questions and provides updated and improved template for compliance with notice requirement.
LawFlash/Client Alert | Labor and Employment LawFlash
Labor and Employment Practice
DLSE issues template notice for use by employers.
LawFlash/Client Alert | Employee Benefits LawFlash
Andy Anderson
Last week, San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee signed legislation that significantly revises parts of the city's Health Care Security Ordinance (Ordinance). In particular, the revised Ordinance imposes detailed design a... more
Presentation | Speech
Daryl Landy
LawFlash/Client Alert | Labor and Employment LawFlash
Labor and Employment Practice
In an opinion with significant implications for California-based employers, and potentially for non-California-based employers, the California Supreme Court has ruled that the daily and weekly overtime requirements of t... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Insurance Recovery LawFlash
Insurance Recovery Practice
The California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, recently issued a decision in Legacy Vulcan Corp. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles , 2010 WL 1730788 (Apr. 30, 2010), that makes it easier for policyhol... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Labor and Employment LawFlash
Labor and Employment Practice
On April 26, in Pearson Dental Supplies, Inc. v. Superior Court (Turcios) , the California Supreme Court expanded the narrow scope of judicial review of an arbitration award in an employment case brough... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Labor and Employment LawFlash
Labor and Employment Practice
The California Court of Appeal's new decision in Coito v. Superior Court , ___ Cal. App. 5th ___ (Cal. Ct. App., 5th Dist., Mar. 4, 2010) opens a can of worms for employers relating to attorney work-product prot... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Labor and Employment LawFlash
Labor and Employment Practice
On November 23, the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) issued an opinion letter stating that employers may deduct vacation and sick leave banks for exempt employees' partial-day absences of fewer ... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Labor and Employment LawFlash
Labor and Employment Practice
In a decision strengthening the right of employers and employees to negotiate the terms of employees' compensation, the California Supreme Court in Schachter v. Citigroup, Inc. , No. S161385 (November 2, 2009), ... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Labor and Employment LawFlash
Labor and Employment Practice
In a much-anticipated opinion, on August 19, the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) aligned itself with federal law by allowing for the simultaneous reduction of a an exempt employee's workweek an... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Intellectual Property LawFlash
Intellectual Property Practice
On August 17, the California Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Christoff v. Nestlé USA, Inc. that right of publicity claims are subject to the single publication rule. But the court left for an... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Labor and Employment LawFlash
Labor and Employment Practice
On June 29, the California Supreme Court issued a decision in Arias v. Superior Court (Angelo Dairy) , No. S155965 (June 29, 2009), that could result in even more lawsuits against employers over wage and hour cl... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | eData LawFlash
eData Practice
On June 29, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed California's Electronic Discovery Act into law, effective immediately . The act contains comprehensive eDiscovery rules that largely parallel... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Labor and Employment LawFlash
Labor and Employment Practice
In a decision with significant implications for California employers of tipped employees, on June 2 the California Court of Appeal reversed the decision of the San Diego Superior Court in Chau v. Starbucks Corp.more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Insurance Recovery LawFlash
Insurance Recovery Practice
Earlier this month in a sweeping victory for policyholders, the California Supreme Court unanimously clarified several important issues on insurance coverage for environmental liabilities. State of California v. Allstate In... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Labor and Employment LawFlash
Labor and Employment Practice
In a case that will be of interest to any company that employs unlicensed accountants, including professional accounting firms, the U.S. District Court for Eastern District of California under Judge Lawrence K. Karlton granted ... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Litigation LawFlash
John Lavelle, Jr., David Schrader, Kathleen Waters
On January 21, the California Supreme Court declined to review the decision issued by the California Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District in Conte v. Wyeth (Case Nos. A116707, A117353; Cali... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Labor and Employment LawFlash
Labor and Employment Practice
On December 10, the California Court of Appeal granted summary judgment in favor of Starbucks Corporation, finding that plaintiffs seeking to represent a potential class of 135,000 job applicants failed to show... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Labor and Employment LawFlash
Labor and Employment Practice
In a case with potentially far-reaching implications for California and non-California employers alike— Sullivan v. Oracle Corporation , 08 C.D.O.S. 13881 (9th Cir. Nov. 6, 2008)—the Ninth Circuit hel... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Employee Benefits LawFlash
Employee Benefits Practice
In August 2006, San Francisco’s mayor signed into law the San Francisco Health Care Security Ordinance (the ordinance). The ordinance requires certain employers operating with the geographic limits of the... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Labor and Employment LawFlash
Labor and Employment Practice
On September 30, Governor Schwarzenegger signed Assembly Bill 10 (AB 10), which clarifies California Labor Code section 515.5’s exemption for computer professionals paid on a salaried basis.
In ad... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Labor and Employment LawFlash
Labor and Employment Practice
In Edwards v. Arthur Andersen LLP , the California Supreme Court has confirmed that even limited noncompetition agreements are not enforceable in California. The Supreme Court also held that release agr... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Labor and Employment LawFlash
Labor and Employment Practice
In a case that may have far-reaching and positive implications for both California employers and employees, the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District held that (1) employers need not ensu... more
Presentation | Speech
Andrew Ruskin
Presentation | Speech
Phoebe Mounts
LawFlash/Client Alert | Labor and Employment LawFlash
Labor and Employment
In August 2006, San Francisco’s mayor signed into law the San Francisco Health Care Security Ordinance (HCSO). The HCSO requires certain employers operating with the geographic limits of the City and Coun... more
LawFlash/Client Alert | Labor and Employment LawFlash
Labor and Employment
Shortly after the November 7, 2006 election, we reported on “Measure F,” which was approved by more than 60% of San Francisco, California residents. Measure F enacted a “Sick Leave Ordinance” (the Ordinance) that require... more
Presentation | Speech
John Ayanian
Presentation | Speech
Scott Karchmer, Heather Brookfield, Zaitun Poonja
Presentation | Webinar
Michael Ossip, Karen Peteros, Sarah Bouchard
Presentation | Speech
Joan Haratani
Presentation | Speech
Joan Haratani
Presentation | Speech
Stephanie Blair
Presentation | Speech
Joan Haratani
Presentation | Speech
Patrick Ryan
Presentation | Speech
Patrick Ryan
Presentation | Speech
W. John McGuire
Outside Publication | Article
Jeffrey Raskin
On August 19, 2002, the California Supreme Court issued its ruling in Dart Industries, Inc. v. Commercial Union Insurance Co., Case No. S086518 (August 19, 2002), a pro-policyholder decision on proving lost policies. The court held that proof of the "actual" policy language was not necessary. Instead, when an insurance policy is lost or was destroyed without fraudulent intent, the policyholder simply "has the burden of proving (1) the fact that he or she was insured under he lost policy during the period at issue, and (2) the substance of each policy provision essential to the claim for relief, i.e., essential to the particular coverage that the insured claims."
Presentation | Speech
Ben Indek
Presentation | Speech
Ron Dreben
Outside Publication | Article
Christopher Banks
Outside Publication | Article
Jeffrey Raskin
Presentation | Speech
Kathleen Collins
Presentation | Speech
Kathleen Collins
Presentation | Speech
Mark Dichter
Outside Publication | Article
Jeffrey Raskin
Published in the Los Angeles Lawyer magazine. Electronic mail has become the telephone of the contemporary office. The availability of electronic mail communications can have important litigation consequences. While most people know that hard copies of electronic messages are subject to discovery, many are unaware that the electronic versions are rarely, if ever, produced in response to a discovery demand.
Outside Publication | Article
Rochelle Alpert
Presentation | Speech
George Edgar
Outside Publication | Article
Rochelle Alpert