The Scali Law Firm is pleased to announce the addition to its team of labor and employment attorney, Dominique Nasr. Dominique brings to the firm her employment advice and counsel, wage and hour class action and employment discrimination and harassment litigation skills.

On April 3, 2014, the California Supreme Court heard Oral Argument in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC (“Iskanian”), a case that will determine whether impediments to arbitration of class wage and hour and other employment claims continue to be viable after the United States Supreme Court’s decision in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion (2011) 131 S.Ct. 1740. The Supreme Court’s ruling in Iskanian will have far-reaching implications for California dealers; it will either remove the impediment to arbitration that Gentry v. Superior Court (2007) 42 Cal.4th 443 and the prosecution of Labor Code Private Attorney General Act (PAGA) claims potentially represent, or it will decide that such impediments are viable justifications to deny enforcement of an otherwise valid arbitration agreement. Individual arbitration of employment disputes allows the dealer and its employee to resolve any wage and hour claims through arbitration and effectively nullify the risk of class proceedings.

Chris Scali's article, Social media sells cars: Implementing a successful social media program can prevent unfair competition, was published in the March 2014 issue of Defender, a publication of the National Association of Dealer Counsel. In his article, Mr. Scali discusses ways to obtain trade secret protection of social media accounts used and maintained by employee's for the benefit of the employer. This article gives tips for broadening a company's intellectual property assets and expanding its rights to prevent departing employees from unfairly competing with it.

On Thursday, the Federal Trade Commission released its top consumer complaints for 2013. Identity theft tops the chart, with "Auto Related Complaints" coming in at #7. Dealerships should take steps to protect the data in their Dealership Management System (DMS).

If a plaintiff’s lawyer sends you a demand letter, you should immediately send it to your own lawyer for a response. A decision that the Appellate Division of the Los Angeles County Superior Court handed down last month shows why.

The Federal Trade Commission and the County of Los Angeles Department of Consumer Affairs announced a nationwide enforcement action targeting deceptive auto dealer advertisements—called “Operation Steer Clear”—which has already resulted in the voluntary settlement of complaints against nine new and used auto dealerships across the country.

This recent opinion from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has potentially given consumer advocates carte blanche to open the floodgates of discovery into deal jackets to obtain information concerning the citizenry of putative class members in the context of a mere pleading motion.

Business is hailing the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in AMEX III as the panacea for the failure of state courts to enforce certain arbitration agreements on the ground that they are unconscionable, but what effect will this have on the California Supreme Court?

In the last six months, California courts have drastically limited an employer’s ability to utilize a piece-rate system to pay its employees.  Important court rulings have made it clear that each “hour worked,” as defined by the Labor Code, must be compensated and itemized if employers intend to exert any type of control, issue any directive, or place any requirement on their employees during non-piece-rate times.

On Tuesday, October 22, 2013, Judge Jed Beebe in the Santa Barbara County Superior Court denied Arturo Martinez’s motion for class certification against Santa Maria Ford for alleged DMV fee lumping violations under the Automobile Sales Finance Act (ASFA) and the Unfair Competition Law (UCL).