Employees who are discriminated at work based on their country of origin generally have the right to file claims with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and in federal andRead MoreKey Facts Concerning Discrimination Based on National Origin
Determining the Amount of Exemplary/Punitive Damages
In California, a claim for punitive damages is broken down into two phases. The first phase is generally the trial to determine the liability of the defendant and the amountRead MoreDetermining the Amount of Exemplary/Punitive Damages
New Ninth Circuit Ruling Applies Dynamex Decision Retroactively – Making It Hard to Say Workers aren’t Employees
The San Francisco Chronicle reported on May 2, 2019, that the California Supreme Court Dynamex decision can be applied retroactively. Dynamex changed the rules in the new gig economy –Read MoreNew Ninth Circuit Ruling Applies Dynamex Decision Retroactively – Making It Hard to Say Workers aren’t Employees
Severance Agreements – What Does the Employer Want
Employers don’t give severance pay through the kindness of their hearts. They want something in return. They may offer severance to encourage older workers to leave so they can replaceRead MoreSeverance Agreements – What Does the Employer Want
California Employees Leaves of Absence, Transfers, Telecommuting and Mental Health Issues
What California Employees Should Know about Workplace Accommodation in 2018: Leaves of Absence, Transfers, Telecommuting and Mental Health Issues By: Steve Danz, Esq. What is the status of workplace accommodationRead MoreCalifornia Employees Leaves of Absence, Transfers, Telecommuting and Mental Health Issues
What California Employees Should Know about Workplace Accommodation in 2018
What California Employees Should Know about Workplace Accommodation in 2018: Reasonable Accommodation vs. Undue Hardship By: Steve Danz, Esq. How do the courts interpret “undue hardship” to employers in exemptionRead MoreWhat California Employees Should Know about Workplace Accommodation in 2018
Wrongful Termination of Los Angeles Attorney Working as In House Counsel
Unusual legal issues arise when an attorney is wrongfully fired by a corporate employer. As Los Angeles wrongful termination employment attorneys, we have seen numerous cases of the conflict that can arise between a corporation who wants the right to terminate an attorney “at will” and the right of the attorney to file suit him or herself if the termination is wrongful. The seminal decision in California on this issue is General Dynamics Corporation vs. Superior Court. Here, an in house attorney was terminated and the court allowed the lawsuit to go forward, noting that “it is unlikely that the (corporation’s) undoubted power to discharge the attorney at will is one that can be invoked under all circumstances without consequence.” (7 Cal 4th at 1175). While noting that an attorney fired from his in-house job may sue, reinstatement is not an available remedy.
The court distinguished an earlier and famous case, Fracasse ve Brent, which allowed a client to fire an attorney without consequence. This was a traditional non-employer, attorney-client relationship However, the General Dynamics court saw the distinction between in hours attorneys virtually dependent on the good will and confidence of a single employer to provide livelihood and carer success and an outside attorney in private practice with multiple clients.
Whistle blower attorneys in Los Angeles should be able to pursue a claim of retaliatory discharge. The rub comes when the ethical obligation of the attorney to protect his client’s secrets at all costs comes into play. The court found that where the elements of a wrongful discharge in violation of public policy can’t be established without breached the attorney-client privilege, then the suit must be dismissed in the interest of preserving the attorney client privilege. (at 1182).
We love to talk law so feel free to e-mail us at
As always, consider our blogs educational in nature only. Legal advise can only be given after full evaluation of the facts of your case.
$5.8 Million Awarded in Class Action Wage and Hour Claim
Just this Tuesday, the United States Supreme Court upheld a $5.8 million award in a class action lawsuit against Tyson Foods, Tyson Foods v. Bouaphakeo. Court-watchers across the country areRead More$5.8 Million Awarded in Class Action Wage and Hour Claim
Misclassification and Racial Discrimination Claims in Los Angeles
Ms. Jewel Gardner, a former employee of DineEquity Inc. (and formerly its predecessor, International House of Pankakes, and then IHOP), who had dedicated 22 years of work to her employer,Read MoreMisclassification and Racial Discrimination Claims in Los Angeles
$3.8 Million Awarded to California Employee in Racial Discrimination Case
Another California employee has been awarded millions of dollars as a result of harassment and retaliation in the workplace. James Duffy began working for the City of Los Angeles inRead More$3.8 Million Awarded to California Employee in Racial Discrimination Case