Proskauer Rose LLP

We are 725+ lawyers serving clients from 13 offices located in the leading financial and business centers in the Americas, Europe and Asia.

The world’s leading organizations, companies and corporations choose us to be their representatives in their most critical situations. But more, they consider Proskauer a strategic partner to drive their business forward. We work with asset managers, major sports leagues, Fortune 500 companies, entertainment industry legends and other industry-redefining companies.

We are entrepreneurial, inclusive, and committed to making a difference for good.

We invite you to review our newly-posted September 2021 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include: Ninth Circuit Rejects “Paramour Preference” Liability Arising From Supervisor’s Affair With Another Employee $3.5 Million Emotional Distress Award Was “Shockingly Disproportionate” To Evidence Of Harm Employee Nonsolicitation Clause Does Not Violate Antitrust Law And Is “Pro-Competitive” Employer Must Prove Employee Knew Or Should Have Known Of Discriminatory Failure To Hire For Statute Of Limitations Bar To Apply Retired Judges May Proceed With Age Discrimination Lawsuit Dutch Executive “Publicly Presented”
A Los Angeles jury has ordered an apartment building owner and property management company to pay $7.6 million to two former live-in apartment managers who claimed to have been wrongfully terminated and discriminated against based upon a medical condition and disability (thyroid cancer). Albert Garcia and his wife Stephanie Garcia sued Gresham Apartments Investors, owners of a Canoga Park apartment building, and the property managers, Seltzer-Doren Management Co. Inc. dba Sierra Management, for: (1) violation of the employment provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) based upon a physical disability; (2) violation of FEHA – housing discrimination; and…
Due to the recent increase in COVID-19 cases, California officials are recommending that private employers require their employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19 or face regular testing.  In an article in the Sacramento Business Journal, Governor Gavin Newsom’s senior advisor and director of the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development, Dee Dee Myers, called on private employers, urging them to follow the state’s lead and mandate COVID-19 vaccinations or regular testing to make way for economic recovery.  This recommendation comes despite hesitancy that the COVID-19 vaccination has only been authorized for emergency use by the Food and Drug Administration. …
A U.S. District Court recently dismissed the lawsuit of a former employee who claimed disability discrimination after he was terminated for testing positive for marijuana in a pre-employment drug test.  Espindola v. Wismettac Asian Foods, Inc., Case 2:20-cv-03702 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 28, 2021).  The Court held that an employer can condition an offer of employment on passing a pre-employment drug screening, including a test for marijuana (the recreational use of which has been legal in California since 2018).  The Court further held that an employer does not have any obligation to engage in the interactive process before terminating an employee…
The California Court of Appeal has ruled that date of birth and/or a driver’s license number cannot be used to identify individuals in an electronic search of the criminal index of court records.  All of Us or None v. Hamrick.  This ruling complicates and further restricts how and even whether (from a practical standpoint) employers can conduct lawful background checks on job applicants and employees. By ordering the Riverside Superior Court to remove birthdates and driver’s license numbers as data that can be used to identify individuals with a criminal record, the ability of employers (and others) to conduct…
We invite you to review our newly-posted July 2021 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include: Board of Directors Quota Law May Be Unconstitutional 2:1 Ratio of Punitive to Compensatory Damages Was Appropriate High School Football Coach’s Title VII Claim Was Properly Dismissed Third Party Was Not Liable for Aiding and Abetting Harassment Teacher’s Discrimination Claim Should Not Have Been Dismissed Economic Damages Award Should Have Been Reduced by Post-Termination Earnings Hotel Did Not Violate Santa Monica’s Recall Ordinance Owner Was Not Personally Liable for
On July 15, 2021, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Ferra v. Loews Hollywood Hotel, LLC, in which it held that meal and rest break premiums required under California Labor Code section 226.7 (“Section 226.7”) must be paid at non-exempt employees’ regular rate of pay—not merely their base hourly rate.  The decision, which applies retroactively, requires that employers promptly adjust their pay practices. Background Like the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), Labor Code section 510 (“Section 510”) requires that employers pay non-exempt employees overtime at their “regular rate[s] of pay.”  Under a different section of the…
On July 9, 2021, President Biden signed an Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy (the “Order”), which, among other things, “encourage[s]” the “Chair of the [Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC”)] . . . to consider working with the rest of the Commission to exercise the FTC’s statutory rulemaking authority . . . to curtail the unfair use of non-compete clauses and other clauses or agreements that may unfairly limit worker mobility.”  To be clear, the Order does not impact the current state of the law or enforceability of noncompetition agreements in any context, including those between an…
Just as California’s employers and small businesses begin to recover financially from the COVID-19 pandemic, the state legislature is about to spring another tax increase on them. This time the money is needed to bail out the severely underfunded unemployment insurance (UI) fund (a program recently featured in the news for paying as much as $2 billion in fraudulent unemployment claims, which included sending checks to death row prisoners). This comes as no surprise to many observers as the UI fund barely met its obligations in prior years. And as claims surged over the past year, California borrowed $21…
Meland v. Weber, ___ F.3d ___, 2021 WL 2521615 (9th Cir. 2021) In 2018, the California Legislature enacted Senate Bill 826, which requires all corporations headquartered in California to have a minimum number of females on their boards of directors; corporations that fail to comply with SB 826 are subject to monetary penalties.  One shareholder of OSI Systems, Inc., Creighton Meland, brought an action challenging the constitutionality of SB 826 on the ground that it requires shareholders to discriminate on the basis of sex when exercising their voting rights in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.  The district court granted…