On August 1, 2024, in Turrieta v. Lyft et al., the California Supreme Court held that a plaintiff in a Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) action does not have a right to intervene -- or to object to or vacate a judgment -- in a separate PAGA action involving overlapping claims.
The Court’s conclusion resolves an issue that is not uncommon in PAGA litigation where a resolution is reached in one of several separate PAGA lawsuits filed against the same employer. And it will make it easier for parties to resolve PAGA actions without fear that settlements will be toppled by other employees or their lawyers.
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