Receiver's Appointing Order Language Controls Who Can File A Corporate Bankruptcy

Q: I was appointed receiver for a corporation. My order of appointment gives me, and me alone, the power to file bankruptcy for the corporation. The former president of the corporation is threatening to file a bankruptcy petition for the corporation in an apparent attempt to oust me. Can he do that?

A: The answer depends on the specific language of your order of appointment. If it specifically vests you, and only you, with the power to file a voluntary bankruptcy for the corporation, then the former president has no right to do so. A number of recent cases have pointed out there is a major ...

Great News for Employers: U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Arbitration Class Action Waivers

On Monday, May 21, 2018, in a 5-4 opinion, the United States Supreme Court issued a long-awaited decision in the case, Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, on the issue of the enforceability of class action waivers in arbitration agreements that bar employees from joining together in class action claims, holding such waivers to be enforceable.  Employers now have the benefit of including class action waivers in arbitration agreements without the uncertainty of the last several years, when jurisdictions differed regarding their enforceability.

The challenge to enforceability in the case ...

Receiver's Use Of An Elisor When A Party On Title Won't Sign Documents

Q: I am a receiver in a family law matter. There is a property held in the name of an LLC, wholly owned by one of the parties. The court has authorized me to sell the property, but the party on title refuses to sign the escrow documents and deed. While I could bring a contempt motion, that is a long, drawn out and expensive undertaking. My broker asked me why I couldn’t just ask the court to appoint me or the clerk as an elisor to sign the documents and deed. What is an elisor?

A: An “elisor” is person appointed by the court to perform functions like the execution of a deed or document. A court ...

Are All Independent Contractors Now Employees? 

Last week the California Supreme Court issued a decision that changes the way California employers do business.  In Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court,  the Court held that a three factor test called the “ABC test” must be applied to determine if an independent contractor is actually an employee subject to the California Wage Orders.  The Court described the test as follows: “Under this test, a worker is properly considered an independent contractor to whom a wage order does not apply only if the hiring entity establishes: (A) that the worker is free from the control and ...

EEOC Extends EEO-1 Filing Deadline

All employers with 100 or more employees, affiliated companies who collectively employ 100 or more employees, and government contractors with 50 or more employees are required to file EEO-1 reports annually with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission or, in the case of government contractors, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs.  The report requires company employment data to be categorized by race/ethnicity, gender and job category.  These reports are usually due by March 31st of the next calendar year.  For 2017, however, the filing deadline has been ...

A Reminder: The IRS Mileage Rates Have Changed

The 2018 mileage rates used to calculate the deductible costs of operating an automobile for business, charitable, medical or moving purposes have increased slightly from last year, or remained unchanged. Specifically, as of Jan. 1, 2018, the standard mileage rates for the use of a car (also vans, pickups or panel trucks) are:

  • 54.5 cents per mile for business miles driven, up one cent from 2017;
  • 18 cents per mile driven for medical or moving purposes, up one cent from 2017; and
  • 14 cents per mile driven in service of charitable organizations

The IRS standard mileage rate for business is ...

A Reminder: Home Care Workers Will Be Entitled to Paid Sick Leave Beginning July 1, 2018

Under California’s Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act of 2014, in-home supportive services (IHSS) workers were specifically excluded from eligibility to receive paid sick leave.  However, beginning July 1, 2018, Senate Bill 3, enacted in 2016, will end the exclusion and extend paid sick leave to IHSS workers. IHSS workers will initially not be entitled to reach the three days or 24 hours of paid sick leave other eligible California workers may receive.  Rather, SB 3 provides that IHSS workers may earn a “full amount” of paid sick leave in which will be increased as the state ...

Assembly Bill 1710 Expands Military Personnel Employment Protections

Effective January 1, 2018, AB 1710 amends Section 394 of the Military and Veterans Code by including protection against discrimination in all terms, conditions or privileges of employment due to membership or service in the military.  This applies to all military service and personnel including the National Guard, and expands existing anti-discrimination measures for military personnel.

The new law also includes criminal and civil penalties for violations.

Employers are reminded to train employees to comply with this law and other existing anti-discrimination laws ...

Sexual Harassment Training Must Now Include Gender Identity, Gender Expression and Sexual Orientation

In light of the substantial media attention given to sexual harassment issues in recent months, employers should anticipate new legislation on this topic. Senate Bill 396, however, was drafted before the increased focus on these issues began.  As of January 1, 2018, the enactment of the Transgender Work Opportunity Act (SB 396) makes California the first state to require that harassment trainings cover the topics of gender identity, gender expression and sexual orientation.

The Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) already required sexual harassment training for ...

New and Proposed Tax Legislation Present New Difficulties for Employers Attempting to Settle Sexual Harassment Claims

Most employers have heard of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, signed into law on December 22, 2017, and have contemplated what it may mean for them.  What has been largely overlooked, however, is a denial of deduction buried deep in section 162(q) of the Internal Revenue Code, which may have a significant impact on employers’ ability to settle lawsuits based on sexual harassment or sexual abuse.  Referred to as the “Harvey Weinstein Tax” (even though it is not a tax), section 162(q) provides:

  • No deduction shall be allowed … for (1) any settlement or payment related to sexual harassment or ...

Subscribe

Recent Posts

Blogs

Contributors

Archives

Jump to PageX

ECJ uses cookies to enhance your experience on our website, to better understand how our website is used and to help provide security. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies. For more information see our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.