Effective, Experienced, Exceptional.

Arbitration

Subscribe to California Appellate Tracker

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Appellate Tracker Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

Labor Code sections 558 and 1197.1, allow the Labor Commissioner to sue for set civil penalties in addition to an amount sufficient to recover underpaid wages if an employer fails to pay overtime wages or minimum wages as required by California law.  This decision holds that in a PAGA suit, the employee plaintiff may recover only the set civil penalty… Read More

A broad arbitration clause in plaintiff's employment agreement was ended by the separation agreement which plaintiff signed on leaving the company's employment, so it did not govern plaintiff’s later claims that defendants breached their fiduciary duties owed to him as a minority shareholder. Read More

Trial court correctly compelled arbitration of plaintiff’s medical malpractice claim, after it was unpersuaded by plaintiff’s argument that she didn’t see or read arbitration warning in her contract with the physician. Read More

As the arbitration agreement did not delegate arbitrability to the arbitrator, the arbitrator erred in deciding a dispute was not arbitrable rather than deciding the merits of the dispute, and the party submitting the dispute to arbitration could raise that error as a ground for vacating the award. Read More

The arbitration clause in a law firm’s partnership agreement was unconscionable and unenforceable because it required the lawyer/partner to pay half the arbitration costs and her own attorney fees, because it restricted the arbitrators’ ability to “override” or “substitute [their] judgment” for that of the law firm’s management, and it required confidentiality about all arbitrations. Read More

Law firm’s investigative due diligence report, completed prior to an acquisition to determine whether target company was in possession of another’s protected trade secrets, is not protected from discovery by any attorney-client privilege because it was jointly directed by and shared with opposing parties in the acquisition negotiations; and it was not protected by the work product privilege because it… Read More

Law firm’s investigative due diligence report, completed prior to an acquisition to determine whether target company was in possession of another’s protected trade secrets, is not protected from discovery by any attorney-client privilege because it was jointly directed by and shared with opposing parties in the acquisition negotiations; and it was not protected by the work product privilege because it… Read More

1 2 3 10