Debra Albin-Riley

Oct 29, 2024 | mondaq.com | Lynn Fiorentino |Debra Albin-Riley |Brian Waldman |Robert Edwards

Safe Harbor Warnings for Acrylamide Exposure From Food The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has amended Title 27, California Code of Regulations 25607.2(b), to provide an additional safe harbor warning option for businesses that cause significant exposures to acrylamide in food products.

Jul 3, 2024 | afslaw.com | Debra Albin-Riley

Debra was previously recognized by Daily Journal as a “Top Health Care Lawyer” in 2023, 2022, 2021, and 2020 and named a “Top Women Lawyer” in 2015 and 2014. Debra has a reputation as a tenacious health care litigator and successfully argued and prevailed before the California Supreme Court to establish significant anti-SLAPP protections for medical staff in peer review matters.

Aug 18, 2023 | jdsupra.com | Debra Albin-Riley |Fernanda Jara

The court found the mandatory vaccination policy, implemented according to federal guidance and with concern for patient safety, was facially nondiscriminatory and objective, and was objectively applied. Termination for reasons nondiscriminatory on their face and honestly believed to be valid by the employer will suffice to show a legitimate reason for adverse employment action under FEHA. The court decision can be found here.

Aug 17, 2023 | natlawreview.com | Debra Albin-Riley

Thursday, August 17, 2023 California health care employers that apply mandatory vaccination policies objectively can take great comfort in a recent California Court of Appeal decision. In Hodges v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, the court found Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (CSMC) did not violate the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) when it terminated an employee for failure to comply with its mandatory flu vaccine policy.

Aug 17, 2023 | afslaw.com | Debra Albin-Riley |Fernanda Jara

The court found the mandatory vaccination policy, implemented according to federal guidance and with concern for patient safety, was facially nondiscriminatory and objective, and was objectively applied. Termination for reasons nondiscriminatory on their face and honestly believed to be valid by the employer will suffice to show a legitimate reason for adverse employment action under FEHA. The court decision can be found here.