Janine Raduechel

May 14, 2024 | mondaq.com | Janine Raduechel |Joshua Rodine

Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court concluded that the "good faith" defense applies to claims seeking to impose penalties under California Labor Code section 226. An employee must show that an employer's failure to comply with section 226(a) was both knowing and intentional in order to establish an entitlement to penalties. Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services.

May 8, 2024 | jdsupra.com | Janine Raduechel |Joshua Rodine

Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court concluded that the “good faith” defense applies to claims seeking to impose penalties under California Labor Code section 226. An employee must show that an employer’s failure to comply with section 226(a) was both knowing and intentional in order to establish an entitlement to penalties. Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services.

Mar 28, 2023 | today.westlaw.com | Joshua Rodine |Janine Raduechel

Enter to open, tab to navigate, enter to select

Mar 28, 2023 | vitallaw.com | Joshua Rodine |Janine Raduechel

© 2023 CCH Incorporated and its affiliates and licensors. All rights reserved.

Mar 24, 2023 | jdsupra.com | Janine Raduechel |Joshua Rodine

Seyfarth Synopsis: A California Court of Appeal ruled that both the Fair Employment and Housing ACT (FEHA) and California’s Pregnancy Disability Leave law (PDL) require a plaintiff to prove that the plaintiff had a condition related to pregnancy and, with a reasonable accommodation, the plaintiff could have performed the essential functions of the job. Lopez v. La Casa de las Madres.