Jackson.Lewis

An employer did not violate California’s Family Rights Act (CFRA) by terminating an employee who engaged in outside employment while out on CFRA medical leave, conduct prohibited by the employer’s policy, the California Supreme Court ruled.

To continue reading this article, please click here. 

A university properly terminated a professor for failing to undergo a fitness-for-duty examination after he had engaged in instances of threatening behavior, the California Court of Appeal ruled, affirming a judgment in favor of the University of San Francisco on a professor’s alleged disability discrimination claims under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). Significantly, the court ruled the university was not required to engage in an “interactive process” before requesting the examination because the professor never sought any accommodation for any disability.

Whether the parties to an arbitration agreement agreed to class arbitration is a question for the arbitrator, not the trial court, the California Court of Appeal ruled, reversing an order dismissing class claims alleging violations of California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act and Unfair Competition Act.

Background

A clause delegating to an arbitrator the authority to decide questions of an arbitration agreement’s enforceability was not unconscionable under California law, the California Court of Appeal ruled.

Ambiguity in settlement agreements can sabotage finality and certainty as a recent California decision shows. Where a settlement agreement is silent regarding litigation costs, an employee can obtain mandatory costs as the prevailing party under state law because the settlement proceeds constitute the required “net monetary recovery,” the California Court of Appeal ruled.

Sending a former employee’s wrongful termination claim to an arbitrator, the California Court of Appeal ruled that his employment arbitration agreement was not unconscionable and deserved to be enforced. The court found that the agreement’s limitations on discovery and on “just cause” terminations, among others, were not substantively unconscionable, and so reversed a lower court order denying arbitration.