In California, our Penal Code prohibits extracting written agreements or promises to pay (employee or not) based on the threat of force or fear. Several cases have established that threatening criminal action is reliance on fear. The employer’s good faith belief in whether or not theft occurred is not legally relevant. So, even an employee who has occasionally stolen from an employer may sue for extortion. California specifically recognizes a private cause of action called “Civil Extortion”, and it is based on the requirements of Penal Code 518. If “consent” is obtained by force or fear, then we have extortion. Whether or not money is actually paid is irrelevant.

In a recent case in this office, we had a food establishment falsely claiming theft by servers, followed by their termination and demands for restitution or “criminal prosecution will follow”. We advised each client to revoke the agreements to repay as products of duress and filed suit to void the agreements and for damages for the accompanying slander (termination paperwork said “terminated for theft”) and emotional distress resulting from the demand.

Under the Federal False Claims Act, individuals who report wrongdoing against the government or third parties, are entitled to a share of the proceeds of any settlement or judgment, along with attorney fees. Danz & Associates has represented whistle blowers in many industries, including health care and aerospace, with recoveries to the government in the millions of dollars. Recently passed legislation such as the Dodd Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act have broadened the avenues for employees to share in financial settlements by their employers. The area of law is highly technical and details count! Consult a qualified attorney while you are still employed so that the proper steps can be taken to preserve your rights.

Susan C.

Stephen Danz & Associates
Employment Attorneys
11661 San Vicente Boulevard
Suite 500
Los Angeles, CA 90049

Dear Steve & Associates,

Thank you for your services as attorney at law in my employment case.I was very pleased with the courtesy and professionalism with which you handled this case in every step from beginning to end

Special thanks to Steve Skoloff for his outstanding performanceduring all phases of the litigation, and specially his exceptional skills in handling the depositions. Also , my special thanks to Shauneen Saebfar, Kathy De La Rosa and Rachel Fishenfeld for their excellence in communication and administrative services.

You will always have my highest regards and recommendation. And, I will always have your information at hand for others we may come across that as us “who should we turn to ?”

Its been a pleasure working with you from the beginning this case to a swift and favourable conclusion. thank you again for your extremely competent and professional services.

Regards,
Armen Abajian,
3290 Dusmere Rd,
Glendale, CA 91206,
aabajian@sbcglobal.net

The bill includes an extension of the time the federal government will subsidize COBRA payments to allow unemployed workers to keep their health insurance from nine months to 15 months. It also fixed a glitch in an earlier unemployment extension bill that should help about 70,000 Michigan workers become eligible for an extension of their benefits.

On the other hand, the defendants contended that the kiss was consensual and even if it was not, that the employer took all necessary steps to investigate the harassment and prevent further harassment by separating the harasser from plaintiff and later by suspending him for one week.  The employer  contended that the reduction in plaintiff’s hours was not retaliatory. 

The trial last approximately 2.5 days and the jury deliberated for approximately 7.5 hours.  The Plaintiff was awarded a total of $226,208.00 in damages.

US jobless rate reaches 9.8 percent in September

By CHRISTOPHER S. RUGABER