Atty Who Overlitigated Contractor Dispute Sees Fee Reduced law360.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from law360.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
On March 1, 2021, the Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District ruled in favor of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health (the “Department”) officials who halted outdoor dining in November 2020 during a spike in COVID-19 cases.
After the Department announced a ban on all outdoor dining, the California Restaurant Association (“CRA”) filed a lawsuit. State Court Judge James Chalfant initially ruled in favor of the CRA on December 8, 2020, and held that the Department acted arbitrarily and failed to perform the required risk-benefit analysis before issuing the ban. Judge Chalfant noted that the Department had not presented any scientific studies tying outdoor dining to increased transmission risk.
Rubin
LOS ANGELES (Legal Newsline) – Plaintiffs using California’s Private Attorneys General Act to sue their employers can’t be sent to arbitration to decide if the case will go to arbitration, a California appeals court recently ruled.
On March 1, the Second Appellate District ruled against Zum Services, which is accused of misclassifying the plaintiffs and others as independent contractors. The company, a transportation service for children, tried to invoke an arbitration clause in their employment agreements, but the appeals court overturned a trial court ruling for Zum.
Letting an arbitrator decide whether the plaintiffs are “aggrieved employees” entitled to make PAGA claims goes against the purpose of the PAGA, the court ruled.
LLC Money-Shuffling and Alter Ego Liability | Patton Sullivan Brodehl LLP jdsupra.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from jdsupra.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Yegan
VENTURA, Calif. (Legal Newsline) – A $30 million verdict in noneconomic damages is a miscarriage of justice, a California appeals court has ruled.
The Second Appellate District’s Jan. 20 decision vacates the verdict and sends the lawsuit over a fatal car accident back to Ventura County Superior Court for a new trial limited to determining a new amount.
The trial court erred when it excluded evidence of the comparative fault of defendants that settled before trial.
“(N)o substantial evidence appears to support the amount of the damages award, an amount that shocks the conscience and appears to have been influenced by the misconduct and improper argument of respondents’ counsel,” Justice Kenneth Yegan wrote.