ECJ Blogs | Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP: Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP

Sexual Orientation Harassment Can Trigger Federal Arbitration Exemption | By: Jared W. Slater

Jared W. Slater — Wed, 05 Aug 2026 09:00:01 -0700

The Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (EFAA) allows a person alleging conduct constituting sexual harassment to proceed in court despite any otherwise valid and enforceable arbitration agreement. Decloedt v. Radnet Management, Inc. confirms that harassment based on an employee’s sexual orientation can qualify as sexual harassment under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), and that a sufficiently pleaded claim of that kind triggers the EFAA’s exemption to the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) which generally enforces ...

CCPA/CPRA Compliance in 2026: What Businesses Still Get Wrong | By: Jeffrey R. Glassman

Jeffrey R. Glassman — Wed, 29 Jul 2026 09:00:02 -0700

Several years into the CCPA and CPRA regime, most companies have the basics in place: a privacy policy, a cookie banner, and a process for responding to consumer requests. Enforcement activity over the past year, however, has made clear that having the paperwork is not the same as being compliant in practice. The California Privacy Protection Agency and the Attorney General's office have both signaled that they are looking past the privacy policy and into how the business actually operates. Below are the gaps we see most often.

Treating the Privacy Policy as the Compliance Program

A ...

Ninth Circuit Confirms Employment-Specific Arbitration Language Survives Cook | By: Jared W. Slater

Jared W. Slater — Tue, 28 Jul 2026 09:00:03 -0700

Since the California Court of Appeal decided Cook v. University of Southern California, employers using “including but not limited to” language to define covered claims in their arbitration agreements have faced a familiar argument from the plaintiffs’ bar: that the phrase renders the agreement’s scope unconscionably limitless, and that overbreadth also taints the agreement’s duration and mutuality. The Ninth Circuit’s decision in Cocom v. ABM Aviation, Inc. gives employers an answer to that argument, one that federal district courts within the circuit will now ...

California's 30-Day Breach Notification Deadline: What Changed Under SB 446 | By: Jeffrey Glassman

Jeffrey R. Glassman — Mon, 27 Jul 2026 09:00:04 -0700

California businesses that experience a data security incident now face a defined 30-day notification deadline under SB 446, a meaningful change from the prior standard, which required notice only “in the most expedient time possible and without unreasonable delay.” The shift from a flexible standard to a hard deadline changes how the first 72 hours of an incident response should be structured, and it raises the stakes for organizations that have not run a breach response before.

Why the Change Matters

Under the prior rule, a business had a defensible argument for taking ...

Five Deal Terms That Deserve a Second Look Before You Sign the LOI | By: Jeffrey R. Glassman

Jeffrey R. Glassman — Fri, 24 Jul 2026 09:00:05 -0700

A letter of intent is meant to be a roadmap, not a finished contract, but the choices made at that stage tend to harden quickly once diligence begins. Buyers and sellers who treat the LOI as a formality often find themselves negotiating from a weaker position later, simply because a term was left vague or assumed rather than addressed head on. Below are five areas that consistently cause friction in middle-market transactions, and that are worth resolving, or at least framing clearly, before the LOI is signed.

1. Earnout Mechanics, Not Just the Earnout Amount

An earnout can bridge a ...

California Broadens the FAA’s Transportation-Worker Exemption for Delivery Drivers | By: Jared W. Slater

Jared W. Slater — Thu, 23 Jul 2026 09:00:06 -0700

In the recently published opinion in Betanco v. Living Spaces Furniture, LLC, the First District Court of Appeal confirmed that a last-mile delivery driver can qualify as a “transportation worker” exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act even where the sale was retail and the delivery never left California. The First District’s inquiry turned on whether the driver remained part of the continuous movement of goods in interstate commerce from origin through delivery. Because the furniture never left that stream, even after a brief pause at a distribution center, his ...

Governor Newsom Signs Executive Order Regarding Growing AI Trend in Employment | By: Jared W. Slater

Jared W. Slater — Wed, 17 Jun 2026 09:00:07 -0700

On May 21, 2026, Governor Newsom signed Executive Order N-6-26, directing state agencies to study the workforce effects of AI and develop recommendations on policy responses, training, safety-net measures, and possible WARN-related updates. The Order does not impose any immediate obligations on private employers and does not directly regulate private employer use of AI. Rather, the Order directs several agencies, including the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA), the Employment Development Department (EDD), and the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic ...

Whose Agreement Is It Anyway? Court of Appeal Rejects Employer’s Attempt to Invoke Staffing Agency Arbitration Provisions By: Jared W. Slater

Jared W. Slater — Tue, 26 May 2026 09:00:08 -0700

In Toothman v. Redwood Toxicology Laboratory, Inc., the California Court of Appeal held that a client of a staffing agency could not invoke the agency’s arbitration agreement to compel arbitration of claims arising from the worker’s subsequent period of direct employment with the client.

Robert Toothman was originally hired by Apex Life Sciences, a temporary employment agency, and signed a companion Employment Agreement and Arbitration Agreement covering disputes arising out of his employment with “Company,” defined as “Apex Life Sciences, LLC, a division of On ...

“All” Means All: The Court of Appeal’s Latest Warning on Overbroad Arbitration Agreements | By: Jared W. Slater

Jared W. Slater — Mon, 11 May 2026 09:00:09 -0700

The recent decision in Stoker v. Blue Origin, LLC is the latest entry in a long line of cases informing the scope and breadth of mandatory arbitration agreements. Although the trial court denied Blue Origin’s motion to compel arbitration based on the federal Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (EFAA), the Second District affirmed on entirely different grounds, holding the agreement procedurally and substantively unconscionable and refusing to sever the offending provisions. This case is another in a recent trend limiting the ...

Inconsistencies Among Contemporaneous Arbitration Agreements May Not Be Fatal to Enforcement | By Jared W. Slater

Jared W. Slater — Thu, 30 Apr 2026 09:00:10 -0700

Employers often rely on multiple onboarding documents to establish an employee’s obligation to arbitrate employment-related disputes. Unfortunately, that approach can invite a challenge from employees who argue that inconsistencies among the documents defeat mutual assent and void an agreement to arbitrate. In that context, the California Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Santana v. Studebaker Health Care Center, LLC highlights the line between “ambiguity,” which courts resolve through contract interpretation, and “uncertainty,” which can actually ...