By Michael Kun
Yesterday, only weeks after its long-awaited Brinker v. Superior Court decision, the California Supreme Court issued another important ruling on California meal and rest period laws.
In Kirby v. Immoos Fire Protection, Inc., the Supreme Court ruled that neither party may recover attorney’s fees on claims involving meal and rest periods. The Court analyzed the legislative history of the meal and rest period provisions and concluded, “We believe the most plausible inference to be drawn from history is that the Legislature intended [meal and rest period] claims to ...
Blog Editors
Recent Updates
- Employers in California: Don’t Forget That “Joint Employers” Are Not Vicariously Liable for Each Other’s Conduct
- Many State and Local Minimum Wages Increased on January 1, 2025
- California Court of Appeal Holds That Every PAGA Action Necessarily Includes an Individual PAGA Claim – and Plaintiffs With Arbitration Agreements Must Arbitrate Their Individual Claims First
- Time Is Money: A Quick Wage-Hour Tip on … California Meal and Rest Period Requirements, Revisited
- California Minimum Wage Will Still Increase Even Though Voters Rejected a Minimum-Wage Hike