Publications
Sign up to receive publications by e-mail.
We'll e-mail you once a week with new publications.
What Are The Limits Of A Court’s Ability To Enforce A Non-Compete Agreement?
October 28, 2021 • Anne-Marie Mizel
Category: Legal Updates
The parties in the case of Daneshgari v. Patriot Towing Services, LLC, No. A21A0887 (Ga.App. Oct. 21, 2021), had entered into a four-year non-compete agreement in June of 2016 that Daneshgari and his partner began to violate within a month after signing the agreement. After PTS sued to enforce the agreement in 2018, a trial court in Georgia granted PTS’s motion for a preliminary injunction and ordered the defendants to cease violating the noncompete provision. The defendants ignored the court’s injunction and continued to operate their competing business. The trial court found Daneshgari in willful civil contempt of the preliminary injunction and ordered him to be incarcerated until he paid PTS $20,000 in attorney fees. Less than one week later, Daneshgari paid the $20,000 and was released from incarceration.
Effective January 1, 2022, a new law exempts certain unionized janitorial employees from suing under the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”). On September 27, 2021, Governor Newsom signed SB 646 into law which specifies that unionized janitorial workers covered by a valid CBA will no longer be allowed to bring civil actions under PAGA.
As a result of the #MeToo Movement, California Senators and Assembly Members introduced numerous bills on sexual harassment prevention. One of the laws that passed included SB 820, the “Stand Together Against Non-Disclosure” (STAND) Act. The STAND Act prohibited preventing the disclosure of factual information relating to claims of sexual assault, sexual harassment, or harassment or discrimination based on sex, filed in a civil or administrative action. Such provisions, if included in settlement agreements, are void as a matter of law and against public policy.
Today the Los Angeles City Council passed an ordinance requiring proof of vaccination against COVID-19 for patrons to enter indoor public spaces in the city. The ordinance will require patrons to be vaccinated to enter certain establishments such as restaurants, bars, nightclubs, gyms, sports arenas, spas, salons, shopping malls, and others. The ordinance will also apply to large outdoor events.
LA Requires Labor Peace Agreements for Hospitality Operations on LA County Property
October 5, 2021 • W. Baker Gerwig, IV
Category: Legal Updates
At the September 15 meeting, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors adopted a new policy that will affect hospitality businesses operating on Los Angeles County property. Policy 5.290 was recommended to the Board in a letter from the office of the County’s Chief Executive Officer. The Policy affects how labor disputes are handled at “hospitality operations” on County-owned or operated properties. “Hospitality operators” is defined in the Policy to include hotels, restaurants, and hospitality/food concessionaires. The Policy will apply regardless of whether or not the entity conducting such operations has leased directly with the County or with the County’s “lessee, licensee, or concessionaire.” It also applies to subleases, sublicenses, assignments, and transfers.
LA County to Issue Mandate for Bars, Nightclubs, and Restaurants
September 16, 2021
Category: Legal Updates
Los Angeles County will require proof of vaccination for customers and employees at indoor bars, wineries, breweries, nightclubs, and lounges. Under the order, customers and employees at indoor nightlife establishments will need to have at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine by October 7 and receive the second dose by November 4, 2021. The order will strongly recommend (but fall short of requiring) vaccine verification for indoor restaurants.
California Law Limiting Mandatory Arbitration Agreements is Mostly Upheld by the Ninth Circuit
September 16, 2021 • Christina Tantoy
Category: Legal Updates
On September 15, 2021, the Ninth Circuit lifted an injunction and mostly upheld a California law, known as Assembly Bill 51 (“AB-51”), that prohibits mandatory arbitration agreements. AB-51 invalidates mandatory arbitration agreements that are a condition of employment, including mandatory agreements that allow an employee to “opt-out” of the arbitration provisions.
California Labor Commissioner Guidance Requires Employers to Pay for COVID Test and Testing Time
September 10, 2021 • Jordan A. Fishman
Category: Legal Updates
Employers may legally require their employees be vaccinated. Consistent with California’s FEHA, all employers with five or more employees have an affirmative duty to make a reasonable accommodation for any employee with a disability or sincerely-held religious belief. Employers must engage in a good faith, interactive process with employees in these situations. One such accommodation may be to require routine COVID-19 testing in lieu of vaccination.
Nationwide Vaccine and PTO Mandate for Employers with 100+ Employees
September 10, 2021
Category: Legal Updates
Yesterday, President Joe Biden announced new vaccine requirements for federal and private sector workers in an effort to increase COVID-19 vaccinations and curb the ongoing spread of the delta variant.
San Francisco Implements Vaccination Mandate for Certain Employees
September 2, 2021 • Christina Tantoy
Category: Legal Updates
Earlier this month, the City of San Francisco revised its “Safer Return Together” Health Order to require restaurants (indoor dining), bars, clubs, gyms, and large indoor events to obtain proof of vaccination from patrons and employees.