As of February 1, 2024, the California Department of Industrial Relations issued a new Time of Hire Notice that is to be provided to all newly hired employees in the State of California. This notice applies to all industrial injuries occurring on or after January 1, 2013, and provides employees information regarding: benefits available through the workers’ compensation system, instruction on what to do in the event of an industrial injury, anti-discrimination provisions related to workplace injuries, and contact details for further information. This updated notice should immediately replace the prior Time of Hire pamphlet that was issued in 2014.

For the fourth year, the California Civil Rights Department (“CRD”, formerly the Department of Fair Employment and Housing) is requiring employers with 100 or more employees to report pay, demographic, and other workforce data for employees assigned to California establishments and/or working within California.

Congress enacted the whistleblower protections of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“Act”) to prohibit publicly traded companies from retaliating against employees who report what they reasonably believe to be instances of criminal fraud or securities law violations. Title 18 U. S. C. section 1514A(a) specifically provides that employers may not “discharge, demote, suspend, threaten, harass, or in any other manner discriminate against an employee in the terms and conditions of employment because of” protected whistleblowing activity.

In Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, the California Supreme Court published its long-awaited decision regarding the trial court’s ability to dismiss or strike Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) claims based on their “unmanageability.” Before discussing the opinion, it is important to first define some key terms.

In recognition of its continuing commitment to promoting diversity and inclusion within the firm and the broader community, Scali Rasmussen has been recognized by the Los Angeles Business Journal as a nominee for its Diversity, Equity + Inclusion Awards. The awards honor diversity, inclusion, and equity champions in the Los Angeles region for their ongoing efforts to advance diversity and inclusion in the workplace and business leadership while simultaneously creating an inclusive environment that enables diversity and equity to thrive. "It is truly an honor to shine the spotlight on these terrific leaders and organizations within the Los Angeles Business community," says the publisher.

Dalton Motors continued its U.S. expansion with the acquisition of a Hyundai franchise in National City in Southern California on January 31.

Buyers of ultra-luxury cars have high expectations, not just of the car and the customer experience, but also the dealership. From the interior materials used to including storage space for clients’ cars, ultra-luxury dealership facilities must create the right environment for their wealthy clientele.

Customer experience is important to all dealerships, but with ultra-luxury brands that takes on a unique dimension. Ultra-luxury brands rely on exceptional events that create and maintain a sense of community among clients and bond them to the dealership. Such bonds are crucial to a dealership’s success.

Ultra-luxury franchises don’t come on the market often, and valuing one involves special considerations that often don’t apply to other auto franchises, say Willie Beck and Todd Berko, managing partners at Bel Air Partners. That’s because ultra-luxury automotive brands are in a league of their own.

In 2023, the California and Federal courts of appeal published opinions on several cases impacting consumers and manufacturers/distributors of consumer products. Of note, the Ninth Circuit held in two cases that a consumer’s false and misleading label claims were preempted by the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, a victory of sorts for manufacturers. In addition, a California Court of Appeal published an opinion giving manufacturers of consumer products a potential defense to Proposition 65 claims.

If a defendant’s anti-SLAPP motion is granted, plaintiff will be required to pay defendant’s attorney’s fees incurred in bringing the motion. Thus, the anti-SLAPP motion is an effective tool to thwart improper lawsuits challenging a party’s First Amendment rights. In 2023, the courts of appeal published numerous opinions relating to the anti-SLAPP motions in a variety of contexts.

In 2023, the courts of appeal were faced with several issues related to Lemon Law cases including the impact of Statutory Offers to Compromise pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 998, the enforceability of arbitration agreements contained in deal contracts, and the impact of trade-ins on restitution. The “big issue” that the California Supreme Court will decide in 2024 or 2025 is whether a manufacturer can enforce an arbitration agreement signed by the buyer and the dealership. Several courts of appeal have published opinions on the issue, many of which are in conflict. The issue will be resolved by the California Supreme Court.

California and Federal courts of appeal published opinions on a wide variety of employment-related cases including wage and hour, whistleblower retaliation, discrimination/ADA, class actions, PAGA claims, and workers compensation. The results are a mixed bag for employers. Of note, the United States Supreme Court was given the opportunity to rule on a crucial ADA issue: whether an ADA “tester” has standing to challenge a business’ failure to provide disability accessibility on its website even if the tester had no plans to visit the business’ premises. Unfortunately, SCOTUS “punted” by dismissing the appeal on a procedural technicality. As a result, the issue remains unresolved.

As has been the case in the last several years, 2023 saw numerous opinions from the California and Federal courts relating to the enforcement of arbitration provisions. The opinions relate to arbitration provisions in the commercial context as well as arbitration in the employment context. Unfortunately, for those seeking to enforce arbitration agreements — particularly employers — the courts upheld virtually all trial court rulings denying motions to compel arbitration. 

Scali Rasmussen Shareholder Jeffrey Erdman and Principal Jasmin Bhandari have been recognized as "Leaders of Influence: Minority Attorneys" and profiled in a special feature by the Los Angeles Business Journal. According to the publisher, the feature highlights "those standout minority attorneys considered to be particularly impactful on the legal scene while serving as trusted advisors in Southern California."

We're proud to announce that Founder & Managing Shareholder Christian Scali has been selected by his peers for inclusion in the 2024 Southern California Super Lawyers list as a "top rated Franchise & Dealership attorney."

A trial court in Alameda County gave a win to employers: entering an order allowing Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. to recover $125,000 in costs from the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA).

Effective January 1, 2012, the Wage Theft Protection Act required that all employers provide each non-exempt employee with a written notice containing specified information at the time of hire. The notice must be in the language the employer normally uses to communicate employment-related information to the employees. The Act also requires that the Labor Commissioner provide employers with a template that complies with the requirements of the notice.

The new year brings a number of payroll, accounting and benefits adjustments that employers and employees alike should keep in mind. Here are a few areas in which updates should be noted.

With the enactment of Senate Bill No. 235 (“SB 235”), California state courts have moved closer to the Federal courts which requires disclosure of initial information in discovery.