In Golden v. California Emergency Physicians Medical Group, et al., a divided Ninth Circuit panel held that a settlement agreement between a doctor and his former employer violated Cal. Prof. & Bus. Code § 16600 because a “no re-hire” provision of the agreement placed a “restraint of a substantial character” on the doctor’s medical practice.
A presumption of irreparable harm in trademark cases may be retired, but evidence of likelihood of confusion can still support an inference of irreparable harm.
Trade dress issues are complex and can often be time consuming. Companies facing these issues can often learn from past precedent. This and selecting an effective attorney for representation can make or break a case.
If you are a smart phone user, you may have wondered why so many new privacy policies have recently rolled out. The reason? The General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) became effective May 25, 2018, and applies to all organizations that handle European Union citizens’ data. Businesses throughout the world, including in the US, are figuring out how to best navigate through what some have called one of the most important corporate compliance events in years, with several controversial provisions. GDPR will substantially increase statutory obligations regarding the processing of personal data placed on data controllers and data processors both inside and outside the European Union. A controller is the entity that determines the purposes, conditions and means of the processing of personal data, while the processor is an entity which processes personal data on behalf of the controller.
Many employers outsource some or all of their payroll and related tax duties to third party payroll service providers. These related tax duties may include withholding, reporting, and paying over certain employment (i.e. FICA, Medicare, SDI) and income taxes to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and California Employment Development Department (EDD).
As technology advances, people are living much longer lives. However, for many people, their golden years have resulted in nothing but heartbreak as they have been the victims of elder abuse.
Employers who are faced with sexual harassment or sexual abuse claims by a current or former employee now have another problem to consider – is the settlement payment and related attorney’s fees incurred in settling the claim deductible? Unfortunately, the answer to that question may now be no.
Recently, both the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and California Franchise Tax Board (FTB) have issued news releases encouraging taxpayers to plan ahead and to withhold the correct amount of taxes from their paychecks in 2018 to account for recent changes in federal tax law.
Over the last twenty years the internet has changed the world. Through the assistance of screen-reading software or other similar devices, visually-impaired individuals can access the internet to, among other things, conduct business, make hotel reservations, or purchase products. However, lawsuits against businesses with websites that do not fully accommodate visually-impaired individuals have exploded in the last few years. Businesses in all industries have faced litigation of this kind, from financial institutions to hotels and restaurants. Even world-renown universities have not been immune to such lawsuits.
Other AALRR Blogs
Recent Posts
- In Cases Involving Financial Transactions, the Money is in the Provable Facts
- California Secretary of State Implements New Filing Access Requirements for Third Party Filings
- Can a Delaware Forum Selection Clause Strip California Shareholders of Their Inspection Rights Where California is the Company’s Principal Place of Business? A California Court Says No.
- A Plaintiff, a Defendant, and a Judge Walk Into an AI Trap
- Watch Out For Insurance Policy Sublimits That Can Result In Less Coverage For Claims
- A Prevailing Plaintiff On A Financial Elder Abuse Claim Is Entitled To An Award Of All Fees Intertwined With The Prosecution Of Such A Claim Which Includes The Successful Defense Of A Competing Claim For Elder Abuse
- A Derivative Plaintiff Who Defeats an Initial Bond Motion Must Still Pay the Ordinary Costs that Go to the Victor if They Lose at Trial
- Density Bonus Agreement Survives Foreclosure: California Court Rules Affordable Housing Covenant Equivalent to Permit Condition
- Can You Contract Away Your Right to a California Jury Trial? The California Supreme Court Clarifies the Limits of Forum Selection Clauses in Contracts Formed in California
- Federal Judges Find Use of Copyrighted Books to Train AI is Fair Use But Differ in How They Get There
Popular Categories
- (33)
- (8)
- (31)
- (7)
- (5)
- (15)
- (1)
- (3)
- (4)
- (2)
- (3)
- (3)
- (1)
- (2)
- (4)
- (1)
- (5)
- (1)
- (2)
- (2)
- (2)
- (1)
- (3)
- (1)
- (2)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
Contributors
- Cindy Strom Arellano
- Gary A. Barrera
- Eduardo A. Carvajal
- Michele L. Collender
- Scott K. Dauscher
- Christopher M. Francis
- Evan J. Gautier
- Carol A. Gefis
- Edward C. Ho
- Micah R. Jacobs
- John E. James
- Jonathan Judge
- David Kang
- Jeannie Y. Kang
- Michael H. Kang
- Matthew D. Kramer
- Joseph K. Lee
- Thomas A. Lenz
- Shawn M. Ogle
- Kenneth L. Perkins, Jr.
- Jon M. Setoguchi
- Ryan C. Squire
- McKenna Stephens
- Jon Ustundag
- Brian M. Wheeler