It is not often that long-standing laws cause a federal court to throw up its arms, but for the second time in little over a year, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has done just that in attempting to understand a California employment law.
Last year, the Ninth Circuit threw up its hands and asked the California Supreme Court to clarify California’s obscure “suitable seating” laws, about which we wrote here.
Now, in Mendoza v. Nordstrom, Inc., the Ninth Circuit has thrown up its hands again, this time asking the California Supreme Court to clarify California’s day-of-rest laws.
Blog Editors
Recent Updates
- The Gig Continues: California Supreme Court Upholds Proposition 22
- Do the PAGA Amendments Create a Trap for California Employers? Yes. Are They Likely to Reduce the Number of PAGA Actions? No.
- The U.S. Department of Labor’s Final Rule Increasing the Salary Threshold for EAP Exemptions Took Effect, Except for the State of Texas as an Employer
- Plaintiffs in California Putative Class Action Lose Numerous Challenges to Enforcing Arbitration, Barring Unclean Hands
- California Governor’s PAGA Deal: What Employers Need to Know - Employment Law This Week