Greenan, Peffer, Sallander & Lally LLP’s Post

Another hit (though unfortunately not unexpected) for California employers. Today, the California Supreme Court, in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., held that trial courts lack inherent authority to strike PAGA claims on manageability grounds. In reaching this conclusion, the Court emphasize that trial courts do not generally possess a broad inherent authority to dismiss claims, and that it is not appropriate for trial courts to strike PAGA claims by employing class action manageability requirements. Furthermore, the Court held that while trial courts may use a vast variety of tools to efficiently manage PAGA claims, given the structure and purpose of PAGA, striking such claims due to manageability concerns — even if those claims are complex or time-intensive — is not among the tools trial courts possess. Link to opinion below: https://lnkd.in/gT3zicGN

Last Thursday, January 18, California’s Supreme Court held in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc. that trial courts lack inherent authority to strike a Private Attorneys General Act claim on manageability grounds. The ruling resolved a prior split of authority on whether PAGA claims may be stricken where there is no manageable way to try them. Check out our blog to learn more about this case and PAGA claims in California: https://lnkd.in/gYurFtdc #CaliforniaSupremeCourt #PAGA #BusinessLaw #LegalNews #EmploymentLaw #CaliforniaEmployers #WorkplaceRights #LaborLaw #EstradavRoyaltyCarpetMills #EmployeeRights #JudicialDecision #PAGAClaims #LaborRelations #mnklaw #mnklawyers Article by Himani Khatter

This is a fascinating development in PAGA jurisprudence. Can the LWDA be liable for costs after a defense verdict in a PAGA case in which the LWDA is not a named plaintiff? At least one trial court has now answered that question in the affirmative. Apparently, in response to a public records request, the defense learned that, over the last three years, the LWDA has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars in PAGA penalties, so it surely has the means to pay a defense costs bill. But if the LWDA can be held liable for costs, will the agency start policing the PAGA cases brought by its proxies (the aggrieved employees) to ensure they have merit? This is an important discussion, and I am interested to see how it plays out.

Here are our takeaways on what today’s ruling by the California Supreme Court in Estrada means for employers facing PAGA representative actions

The California Supreme Court just struck down a crucial tool used by trial courts in managing PAGA cases. Despite this ruling, there are still tools at employers' disposal in defending against PAGA claims. My colleagues, Robert Blumberg, Rachael Lavi and Michael Nelson, review a decision by the #California Supreme Court ruling that trial courts lack inherent authority to strike (dismiss with prejudice) claims under the #PAGA and mention some of the tools still available. #employmentlaw #Littler #localeverywhere

Another groundbreaking settlement of $3,000,000 in a class action wage and hour lawsuit for our deserving clients. Kimball Jones does it again, delivering justice and securing victories! ⚖️💼 #WageAndHour #JusticeServed #LawyerLife #LegalWin #ClientAdvocacy #SettlementSuccess #LegalJustice #KimballJonesLaw #LegalVictory #ClassActionChampions

Recent #court rulings post-Loper Bright show a significant shift: Skidmore deference, once a fallback, is largely ignored, reflecting deeper changes in how federal judges view #agency interpretations. This could redefine agency influence in regulatory matters. #LegalAnalysis #RegulatoryChange

Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Maryanne G. Gilliard has filed a lawsuit, alleging the state is underpaying judges by incorrectly applying salary increases. This case could lead to significant back pay for judges and impact how judicial compensation is calculated across California. For more details, read our blog: https://lnkd.in/gM9bZ3nZ #LegalUpdate #JudicialPay #CaliforniaLaw #Compensation #JudicialSystem #LawFirm #LegalBlog #EmploymentLaw #RichardLiu #CaliforniaJudiciary #LegalInsights

Important news for employers: A District Court Judge has issued a preliminary injunction blocking the FTC's Non-Compete Rule for specific plaintiffs, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Read Randi Weller Kochman and Marissa Mastroianni's latest article to learn more about this ruling and its potential future. https://lnkd.in/evdxFq8T #employmentlaw #noncompetes #FTC #lawyeringisourart

A Bigtime California Supreme Court decision this morning in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills rejecting a manageability requirement in PAGA actions: "We now conclude that trial courts lack inherent authority to strike PAGA claims on manageability grounds. In reaching this conclusion, we emphasize that trial courts do not generally possess a broad inherent authority to dismiss claims. Nor is it appropriate for trial courts to strike PAGA claims by employing class action manageability requirements. And, while trial courts may use a vast variety of tools to efficiently manage PAGA claims, given the structure and purpose of PAGA, striking such claims due to manageability concerns — even if those claims are complex or time-intensive — is not among the tools trial courts possess." My case, Woodworth v. Loma Linda Hospital, had held the same, and was being held pending Estrada. A great win for employee rights. #appellate #employmentlaw #paga #Californialitigation #wageandhour #appellatelinkedin