California Supreme Court

  • Reeves v. Hanlon (2004) 33 Cal. 4th 1140 (affirms a judgment in our client’s favor on claims for intentional interference with contractual relations, misappropriation of trade secrets and sets standards for claims of tortious interference with at-will employment contracts)
  • Turner v. Anheuser-Busch (1994) 7 Cal. 4th 1238 (establishes the law in California on what is a constructive discharge)

California Court of Appeal

  • Cho v. Chang (2013) 219 Cal. App. 4th 521 (upholding trial court’s denial of anti-SLAPP motion to cross-complaint allegations of defamation and intentional infliction of emotion distress for plaintiff’s comments to other employees)
  • O’Byrne v. Santa Monica-UCLA Med. Ctr. (2001) 94 Cal. App. 4th 797 (affirming summary judgment on physician’s claims for breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty arising from his removal from emergency department call panel and denial of certain clinical privileges)
  • Motion Picture and Television Fund Hospital v. Superior Court (2001) 88 Cal. App. 4th 488 (plaintiff’s peremptory challenge to disqualify judge was untimely filed)
  • GAB Business Services v. Lindsey & Newsom Claim Services (2000) 83 Cal. App. 4th 409 (court reversed jury verdict against our client, a company that provides independent insurance adjusting services, on claims against a former corporate officer and a competitor company for breach of fiduciary duty and unfair competition)
  • Cruz v. Homebase (2000) 83 Cal. App. 4th 160 (narrows the definition of who is a managing agent for purposes of assessing punitive damages against corporation)
  • Pang v. Beverly Hospital (2000) 79 Cal. App. 4th 986 (helping a parent move to a new home, even though parent was under medical supervision, did not qualify as leave to care for a parent under the California Family Rights Act)
  • Saret-Cook v. Gilbert, Kelly, Crowley & Jennett (1999) 74 Cal. App. 4th 1211 (upholds defense sexual harassment verdict, judgment on cross-complaint and $1 million attorneys’ fees award to employer improperly sued for sex harassment)
  • Bardin v. Lockheed Aeronautical Systems Company (1999) 70 Cal. App. 4th 494 (upholds right of employer to give accurate references)
  • Cooper v. Superior Court (1997) 56 Cal. App. 4th 744 (striking punitive damages in sexual assault case involving health care provider)
  • Gosvener v. Coastal Corporation (1996) 51 Cal. App. 4th 805 (established standards for an employer’s reasonable accommodation of alcoholism under Labor Code Section 1025 and the Fair Employment and Housing Act)
  • Kirmse v. Hotel Nikko of San Francisco (1996) 51 Cal. App. 4th 311 (summary judgment upheld; at-will employment)
  • Davis v. Consolidated Freightways (1994) 29 Cal. App. 4th 354 (employer that adheres to progressive discipline policies or procedures does not defeat at-will employment policy; restricts recovery for employee republication of defamatory statements; and restricts when employees can sue for alleged unlawful polygraph examinations)
  • Jackson v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (1990) 220 Cal. App. 3d 1315 (statute of limitations on personal injury based on a statutory violation)
  • Fisher v. San Pedro Peninsula Hospital (1989) 214 Cal. App. 3d 590 (establishes the law of what constitutes a hostile work environment for sexual harassment under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act)
  • Cedars-Sinai v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal. App. 3d 414 (malicious prosecution)

United States Court of Appeals

  • Venetian Casino Resort LLC v. NLRB, 793 F.3d 85 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (employer’s request that police issue criminal citations to demonstrators and block them from employer-owned sidewalk because of alleged trespass was protected under First Amendment right “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”)
  • Venetian Casino Resort LLC v. EEOC, 530 F.3d 925 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (EEOC must give advance notice to employer and follow other requirements of Freedom of Information Act before disclosing employer-submitted confidential information to third parties)
  • Venetian Casino Resort LLC v. EEOC, 409 F.3d 359 (D.C. Cir. 2005): (court held that lawsuit, which challenged EEOC’s regulations on handling employer-submitted confidential information, was “ripe” for judicial review)

United States District Court

  • Gutierrez v. Sea World LLC, 2014 U.S. Dist. Lexis 139793 (S.D. Cal. 2014) (granting employer’s motion to compel arbitration and stay court proceedings pending arbitration of employee’s claims)
  • Moore v. County of Los Angeles, 194 LRRM 2279 (C.D. Cal. 2012) (granting summary judgment for employer on First Amendment retaliation claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  • Eng v. County of Los Angeles, 737 F. Supp. 2d 1078 (C.D. Cal. 2010) (granting summary judgment for employer on First Amendment retaliation claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983)
  • Ochai v. Regents of University of Cal, 2009 U.S. Dist. Lexis 115912 (C.D. Cal. 2009) (granting judgment on the pleadings for employer and individual defendants on various causes of action)
  • Pieszak v. Glendale Adventist Medical Center, 112 F. Supp. 2d 970 (C.D. Cal. 2000) (granting summary judgment for employer and individual defendants on employee’s claims of sexual harassment, retaliation, wrongful termination, and other causes of action)

National Labor Relations Board

  • Haynes Building Services, LLP, 2014 NLRB Lexis 94 (2014) (ALJ held that employer lawfully sought to compel arbitration of employee’s putative class action lawsuit based on employee’s prior agreement to arbitrate)
  • Windsor Redding Care Center, 2012 NLRB Lexis 875 (2012) (ALJ held that employer lawfully discharged two union supporters and did not fail to bargain with union)
  • Sheraton Universal Hotel, 350 NLRB 1114 (2007) (employer lawfully terminated a supervisor for refusing to remove a union pin from his lapel)
  • W San Diego, 348 NLRB 372 (2006) (employer established “special circumstances” to justify ban on union insignia where guests may be present and in the kitchen where it posed a risk of food contamination)
  • Sofitel San Francisco Bay, 343 NLRB 82 (2004) (overturned a narrow election victory for union as a result of union’s misleading campaign materials; union subsequently withdrew petition)
  • Holiday Inn City Center, 332 NLRB 1246 (2000) (petitioned-for unit of employees was inappropriate; union subsequently withdrew petition)
  • Service Employees Local 87 (Cresleigh Management), 324 NLRB 774 (1997) (union engaged in unlawful secondary boycott after employer established reserved entrance for contractor in dispute with union)
  • Refuse Compactor Service, Inc, 322 NLRB 738 (1996) (Board denied General Counsel’s motion for summary judgment on employer’s answer to compliance specification)
  • Anaheim Town & Country Inn, 282 NLRB 224 (1986) (employer lawfully refused to honor collective bargaining agreement signed by manager and lawfully discharged manager for allowing union to organize employees)
  • Service Employees Local 44 (Sir Francis Drake), 274 NLRB 501 (1985) (union unlawfully attempted to force employer to assign certain work to its members rather than to the employer’s non-union employees)

National Labor Relations Board General Counsel Decisions

  • Sands Casino Resort Bethlehem, 2012 NLRB GCM Lexis 6 (2012) (NLRB General Counsel dismissed unfair labor practice charge challenging employer’s improved benefits for non-union employees while withholding the improved benefits from newly-organized bargaining unit)
  • Century Plaza Hotel & Towers, 2005 NLRB GCM Lexis 38 (2005) (NLRB General Counsel dismissed unfair labor practice charges challenging several employers’ use of lockout and other aggressive bargaining tactics)
  • Hilton San Diego Mission Valley, 2000 NLRB GCM Lexis 64 (2000) (NLRB General Counsel dismissed unfair labor practice charge challenging employer’s handling of Social Security no-match letter)

Labor Arbitration Awards

  • Gaylord National Harbor, 128 LA 821 (Abrams, 2010) (awarding employer work assignments language proposals in an interest arbitration)
  • Hotel del Coronado, 10-2 ARB ¶5125 (Bordone, 2010) (employer had just cause to discharge employee who tested positive for alcohol while on duty)
  • La Costa Resort and Spa, 124 LA 964 (Wormuth, 2007) (employer had the right to require restaurant servers to close their own guest checks, rather than rely upon a cashier, and did not have to increase servers’ wage rate)
  • Sebastiani Vineyards, 85 LA 371 (Rothstein, 1985) (employer had the right to award foreman position to more qualified employee rather than most senior employee)
  • Lash Distributors, 74 LA 274 (Darrow, 1980) (employer had just cause to suspend employee for low production)