By Michael Kun
Yesterday, only weeks after its long-awaited Brinker v. Superior Court decision, the California Supreme Court issued another important ruling on California meal and rest period laws.
In Kirby v. Immoos Fire Protection, Inc., the Supreme Court ruled that neither party may recover attorney’s fees on claims involving meal and rest periods. The Court analyzed the legislative history of the meal and rest period provisions and concluded, “We believe the most plausible inference to be drawn from history is that the Legislature intended [meal and rest period] claims to ...
Recent Updates
- Menopause as a Protected Class: Growing Trend or a Hot Flash?
- The Second Circuit Joins Fellow Circuits in Extending Limitations on Mandatory Arbitration Agreements
- Updating Your First Aid Kit: What Employers Need to Know About Opioid Antagonist Requirements in New York
- New DOL Guidance Reiterates Key Priorities for MHPAEA Enforcement - Takeaways for Plan Sponsors
- Shh! Press the Button: New York State DOL Proposes Silent Response Button Rules for Retail Workplace Violence Prevention