Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court, 80 Cal. Rptr. 3d 781, 800 (2008), review granted and opinion superseded in 85 Cal. Rptr. 3d 688 (Oct. 22, 2008), California's Fourth District Court of Appeal substantively altered the wage and hour landscape through its conclusion that California meal and rest period regulations only impose a passive obligation on employers to make breaks available. This legal finding, according to the Brinker court, renders meal and rest period claims hopelessly uncertifiable as a class action, as the employee's option to waive a meal or rest period requires a case-by-case inquiry into the reason each individual break was not taken. While the Brinker decision is currently pending review by the California Supreme Court, Brinker's analysis is not the be-all end-all when it comes to class adjudication of meal and rest period claims. Regardless of the outcome in Brinker, numerous meal and rest break theories will continue to be suitable for class adjudication.
Claims Involving Uniform Barriers to Breaks
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
Summary Judgment Denied Defendant in Declaratory Action by Producer of To Kill a Mockingbird Broadway Play Seeking Amateur Theatrical Rights
“Baseball arbitration” refers to the process used in Major League Baseball in which if an eligible player's representative and the club ownership cannot reach a compensation agreement through negotiation, each party enters a final submission and during a formal hearing each side — player and management — presents its case and then the designated panel of arbitrators chooses one of the salary bids with no other result being allowed. This method has become increasingly popular even beyond the sport of baseball.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.