After years of appellate cases and several rulings holding California employers to the very strict payment standards of the California Arbitration Act (CAA), the California Supreme Court has, for the first time, addressed whether provisions of the CAA are preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). In Hohenshelt v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, the Court ultimately held that Code of Civil Procedure § 1281.98 remains valid and enforceable. Nevertheless, the decision represents a meaningful victory for employers because the Court rejected a rigid application of the ...

A recent decision from California’s Fifth District Court of Appeal has deepened the divide among state courts on a critical issue under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA): whether a plaintiff may pursue representative claims for Labor Code violations they did not personally experience.  In CRST Expedited, Inc. v. Superior Court, the court concluded that such “headless” PAGA actions are permissible under the statute.  This holding appears to directly contradict the Second District Court of Appeal’s opinion in Leeper v. Shipt, Inc., which required a plaintiff to ...

California is adapting to the prevalence of technology in the modern workplace – especially artificial intelligence – as these digital tools become more embedded in business infrastructure. Among other consequential AI-related bills currently under consideration, Assembly Bill 1221 (AB 1221) stands out.  Now advancing through the legislature, the bill is poised to impose comprehensive restrictions on workplace surveillance technologies.

If enacted, the bill would require businesses to provide clear and timely notice – at least 30 days in advance – before ...

As AI and automation tools become increasingly integrated into hiring and workplace operations, California’s Assembly Bill 1018 (AB 1018) is drawing significant attention for its potential to reshape how employers use these technologies. While the bill is intended to enhance fairness and transparency, it also raises important questions about compliance, liability, and practical challenges for businesses across the state.

AB 1018 follows a similar proposal from 2024, Assembly Bill 2930, which failed to advance out of legislative committee. That earlier bill raised many of ...

            Employers have long been scrutinized for perceived unequal bargaining power when it comes to enforcement of company-drafted arbitration agreements.  Indeed, both the California legislature and the courts have aimed to protect employees from unduly oppressive, one-sided, or otherwise unfair agreements.  In some cases, this scrutiny extends to extrinsic statements and circumstances surrounding an employee’s review and signing of an otherwise enforceable arbitration agreement.

            In Velarde v. Monroe Operations, LLC, an employer was denied the right to compel arbitration ...

On June 30, 2025, the Supreme Court granted a petition for certiorari from Cox Communications Inc. and agreed to weigh in on one of the most consequential digital copyright cases in recent memory. The Court’s ruling could redefine the scope of liability for internet service providers (“ISP”) and clarify the standards for contributory infringement and willfulness in the digital age.

How We Got Here

In 2018, a coalition of more than 50 major record labels filed suit against Cox in the Eastern District of Virginia, alleging that Cox had turned a blind eye to massive copyright ...

Cross Country Healthcare, Inc., a healthcare staffing company, believed that it had a “squeaky clean” Arbitration Agreement with its employees.  Indeed, the Arbitration Agreement seemed unimpeachable by current California standards: it included: (1) a mutual acknowledgement that arbitration would be the exclusive method of resolving claims between the employer and employee in connection with the employment relationship; (2) a clause that the employer would pay arbitration fees not normally incurred if the action was brought in a court of law; (3) a statement that the ...

            Until two weeks ago, no U.S. court had ruled on whether training generative AI models on copyrighted works could constitute a fair use, or if the simple act of training such models without a license would constitute copyright infringement. Two new summary judgment rulings out of the Northern District of California have now set the stage for how future courts may interpret fair use in the context of AI training—Richard Kadrey, et al., v. Meta Platforms, Inc. and Andrea Bartz, et al. v. Anthropic PBC. That stage poses significant dangers for technology companies.

            In both cases, the ...

Suno is a leading AI-powered music generation platform which transforms simple text prompts, images, videos, or audio clips into fully produced songs complete with vocals and instrumentation. Last week, renowned music producer Timbaland faced backlash after he shared a demo online which was created using Suno’s platform. Shortly after the video was posted, fans noticed that Timbaland’s demo bore a striking resemblance to a beat made by another producer, K Fresh Music. K Fresh’s audible signature tag was even retained in the AI track but no credit was ever given to K Fresh for ...

Q: I am a California state court receiver in a family law case. The divorcing couple owns property in Virginia and Michigan. I know, generally, that in order for me to sell the property I would have to be appointed ancillary receiver in each state. Is there a cheaper, more efficient, way for me to sell the property without being appointed ancillary receiver and having to deal with three courts.

A: There might be. The reason an ancillary receiver is generally needed for a receiver to deal with out of state assets is because a state court receiver’s authority is restricted to the territorial ...