Tom Thomas

California Labor Code §3208.3 Claims: How is “Sudden and Extraordinary” Defined? - https://lnkd.in/ghTygSvq In California, employers are required to carry no-fault workers’ compensation insurance coverage for their employees. If a person is hurt on the job, they can file for benefits. However, California Labor Code § 3208.3(d) states that employers cannot be held liable through a workers’ compensation claim for a “psychiatric injury” of an employee who has not been on the job for at least six months. With that being said, situations where a psychiatric injury was caused by a “sudden and extraordinary” event are an exception. Here, our Sacramento workers’ compensation defense law firm explains how “sudden and extraordinary” is defined under California law. Know the Basics: Psychiatric are Compensable After Six Months of Employment In California, workers' compensation laws provide that psychiatric injuries are compensable, but with a notable caveat: the employee must have been employed for at least six months. If a worker develops a psychiatric injury after one day on the job, that injury is presumptive (but not automatically) non-compensable. The six-month requirement is based on the principle that sufficient employment duration allows for a fair assessment of work-related psychiatric stressors. Note: California’s workers’ compensation laws require six months of total employment. The six-month period need not be continuous. An Exception to the Six-Month Requirement for Sudden and Extraordinary Incident There is a critical exception to the six-month rule for psychiatric workers’ compensation claims in California: Trauma caused by a “sudden and extraordinary” event is compensable regardless of an employee’s tenure. In other words, a worker may apply to get workers’ compensation benefits for a psychiatric injury right away as long as they can assert that they endured some form of sudden and extraordinary event in the workplace. How California Defines “Sudden and Extraordinary” in Workers’ Compensation Cases The definition of “sudden and extraordinary” events in California workers' compensation cases can be central to these cases. However, the legal definition is somewhat vague, and courts will always closely examine the specific facts of the case. From a legal perspective, these terms have been interpreted to mean that a psychiatric injury within the first six months must be: Unforeseeable (sudden); and Unusual and inherently traumatic (extraordinary). The California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) generally looks for incidents that deviate significantly from the routine work activities an employee might be expected to perform. For instance, a retail worker experiencing a violent armed robbery could be considered exposed to a "sudden and extraordinary" event, given th

4

CDF Partner Mark S. Spring recently authored an article for Law360 that delves into the recent California Supreme Court decision that upholds Prop 22, allowing app-based drivers to remain as independent contractors. This ruling holds significant implications for companies such as Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, and others operating in California and hiring app-based drivers. See the attached article to read more about the potential implications of this decision. #prop22 #caemplaws #gigeconomy

6

1 Comment

Macrae's latest 2024 H1 Law Firm Partner Report reveals a nuanced picture of the Bay Area's legal hiring landscape. Despite a 27% annual decrease in lateral partner hirings at Bay Area Am Law 50 firms, signs point to a potential rebound in the near future. Julieta Stubrin, a managing director in our Bay Area offices, provides a deep dive into these trends, stating, "Overall, the trend is that firms are more invested in hiring." The data reveals: 🖊 An expected resurgence in IP law hiring in the latter half of 2024 🖊 A significant 22% increase in corporate law lateral partner hires 🖊 Notable upticks in areas like private equity, litigation, and antitrust Read the full article by Samson Amore in The Recorder, published earlier this week, for a comprehensive overview of the current state and future expectations in the Bay Area legal market*: https://lnkd.in/gmiecZM2 *Note this does sit behind a pay wall and a subscription may be needed to read the full article.

12

1 Comment

Lara Shortz shared with Law360 her take on the recent Supreme Court of California decision regarding Proposition 22, which permits app-based companies to classify their drivers as independent contractors rather than employees. Lara noted that while Proposition 22 specifically targets app-based drivers, its framework might inspire similar legal carveouts for other industries and open doors for broader applications, potentially influencing independent contractor classifications in other sectors. Read Lara's insights here: https://lnkd.in/gaintuFH required) #LegalInsights #LaborLaw #Prop22 #MichelmanAndRobinson

24

1 Comment

Lighthouse Legal Search Bay Area & California Quarterly Report - July 2024 Based on our data, in this latest quarter, of all lateral partner moves to major law firms in the Bay Area, 25% were in Litigation, 20% in Corporate, 15% in Intellectual Property, 10% in Labor & Employment, and 5% in Health Care. The top firms adding the most partners this quarter were Gordon & Rees LLP, Sideman & Bancroft, LLP, and WilmerHale. Litigation remains the largest growth practice area, reflecting ongoing high demand, while Corporate and Intellectual Property practices continue to expand due to increased activity in mergers and acquisitions, venture capital, and technology transactions. By Contrast: California as a Whole In California as a whole, the breakdown of lateral partner moves is as follows: 23% in Litigation, 12% in Labor & Employment, 9% in Corporate, 8% in Intellectual Property, and 3% in Banking. This broader state-wide trend shows a higher concentration in Litigation and Labor & Employment compared to the Bay Area, while Corporate and Intellectual Property moves are slightly less prominent. This indicates a robust demand for litigation expertise across the state and a significant focus on employment-related legal services. Firms experiencing the most growth in partner additions statewide this quarter are Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP, Ogletree Deakins, and Greenberg Traurig LLP. #LegalIndustry #LateralMoves #LawFirmGrowth #BayAreaLaw #CaliforniaLaw #Litigation #CorporateLaw #IntellectualProperty #LaborAndEmployment #HealthCareLaw #PartnerAdditions #LegalRecruitment #LawFirmTrends #LighthouseLegalSearch

1

Washington state has agreed to pay U.S. law firm Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP up to $2.5 million for legal work on its lawsuit seeking to block Kroger’s $25 billion purchase of rival grocer Albertsons, contract records show. The documents, obtained by Reuters through a records request, show two partners at the firm are charging the state more than $1,100 an hour. Washington state sued Kroger in January, claiming its merger with Albertsons would drive up prices. The U.S. Federal Trade Commission and the state of Colorado are also challenging the proposed transaction in other lawsuits. Kroger and Albertsons have defended the deal and are fighting the cases. Read more: https://reut.rs/3VrKkZi 

5

Jacko Law Group Regulatory Tip of the Week by Michelle L. Jacko, CSCP Are You in Compliance with the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)? Many businesses outside California may believe the CCPA does not apply to them, but it often does, especially for mid-size firms. The CCPA, effective January 1, 2020, enhances privacy rights and consumer protections for California residents. It applies to for-profit businesses that serve CA residents and either: • Have gross annual revenue over $25 million • Buy, sell, or share personal information of 100,000 or more CA residents • Derive 50% or more of annual revenue from selling CA residents’ personal information The CCPA requires businesses to inform CA consumers about collected personal data, its sale or disclosure, to limit the sale of personal data, and safeguard consumer rights, including protections against discrimination. In 2023, new protections were added, allowing consumers to correct inaccurate information and limit the use of sensitive data. Businesses must evaluate CCPA applicability and ensure proper disclosures via website links and other methods. For more information, contact Jacko Law Group at [email protected]. #datasecurity #ccpa #jackolaw

2

Biotech mergers and acquisitions might be on the brink of a major surge. With big pharma facing significant patent cliffs, like potential revenue losses totaling $183.5 billion by 2030, and holding $380 billion in cash reserves, the stage is set for an uptick in biotech deal-making. Companies like Merck, Biogen, and Bristol Myers could be poised to invest in biotech firms that are advancing through Phase II or III trials. As we watch this space, it’s clear that the intersection of patent expirations and available capital could spark a dynamic shift in the biotech industry. #Biotech #PharmaMergers #MergersAndAcquisitions

5

California’s Private Attorneys General Act has undergone substantial reform, and businesses should be prepared to utilize PAGA 2.0’s new cure and conduct of compliance features, which should substantially decrease and could possibly negate PAGA claims and damages. Alex Polishuk and Lindsay David discuss these changes in their latest update and will go into further detail in our upcoming webinar on July 31st: https://lnkd.in/ghMV6bxG. #paga #californiaemploymentlaw #employmentlaw

9

Thanks to Law360 for publishing our article on the new privacy litigation trend in California -- Song-Beverly Credit Card Act claims based on online transactions. And thanks to Desirée Hunter-Reay for helping write it. Hopefully, we can nip this trend in the bud before it turns into another CIPA Pen-Trap situation. https://lnkd.in/gvgyrFMz

11

As we previously reported, the California AG’s office recently provided clarification through FAQs on the California ​“hidden fee” law that amended the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, SB 478. Those FAQs articulated the position that restaurants must include all mandatory fees, including service charges and mandatory gratuity, as part of the displayed price for a product, while distinguishing delivery fees on the grounds that those fees are for a separate service. Simone Roach presents the key points from Donnelly McDowell and Beth Chun's article in our latest podcast episode: https://lnkd.in/eGnCCGuD #ConsumerProtection #HiddenFees #CaliforniaLaw #LegalUpdate #KelleyDrye

5

The California DFPI today posted its long-awaited "final" regulations on earned wage access and income share agreements. (Look at the docs dated March 14th under PRO 01-21.) I use quotes, because late last month the CA Office of Administrative Law rejected these rules for various technical reasons (also in the link below). While the DFPI will have to fix these issues and resubmit the rule for approval, we don't expect the substance to change. For EWA programs under this new rule, DFPI deems EWA programs (income-based advance in their terminology) to be loans. However, if providers register with the DFPI, those providers are exempt from the fee restrictions / rate caps that apply to traditional lenders in California. DFPI also provided its statement of reasons, in which it addresses the many comments it received during the process. With respect to its initial proposal to impose rate caps, DFPI acknowledges its failure to conduct a proper economic impact analysis. As a result, DFPI decided to withdraw the rate cap portion of the proposal.

34

3 Comments

Many people have legal entities ranging from a single-member limited liability company (LLC) to a corporation, limited partnership (LP) or charity (such as a family foundation). It is more common than you’d think that those entities are unknowingly out of regulatory compliance, which can mean that your entity isn’t authorized to do business, doesn’t have liability protection, may incur fees and penalties or could have its legal status revoked. Read this article from David Bawden on how to avoid a compliance scare. https://lnkd.in/gAS7jbCa While focused on entities formed in California, the concepts in the article generally apply to legal entities formed anywhere in the United States. #LegalEntityManagement #nonprofit #California

16

Director of Corporate Affairs Lauren Scott is featured in the latest episode of the Good Garbage Podcast with Ved Krishna. Lauren discusses the challenges that #compostable products face in the context of #EPR policies and in California's #SB54. In this audio clip, Lauren discusses SB 54 draft regulations as they pertain to compostables and specifically the challenges with proposed composter acceptance thresholds. Listen to the full podcast at: https://loom.ly/gZY5WjE #GreenTech #PHA #polyhydroxyalkanoates #SustainableSolutions #biopolymers

31

Totally agree with the analysis of the significance of the NVCA forms in making the venture market more efficient. If anything, the adoption numbers actually look low in my experience and I've also found that adaptations of the NVCA forms have become the dominant document set for priced Series Seed rounds. Having been on the drafting committee for about 15 years, I would add two other reasons for its success: 1️⃣ The forms captured the market terms, rather than defined it. Even before the NVCA forms, venture deals largely shared a common structure of deal terms. It was just that every law firm had its own way of documenting it. With the forms, even if a firm substantially marks up the form, you can redline against the NVCA forms and quickly identify material changes. 2️⃣ Updates to the forms "chase" the market rather then set it. When the updating committee met, the two primary reasons for changes were (i) perceived shifts in market terms; and (ii) changes in Delaware law that impacted deal terms. If I can add a plug, on June 1 the Angel Capital Association will be launching a model enhanced convertible note document. The drafting committee, in which I participated, have tried to do what Y Combinator achieved for SAFEs and what the NVCA achieved for price equity. Standardization reduces cost and that is win for founders and investors. #venturecapital #startups

26

6 Comments

𝗚𝗠𝗦𝗥'𝘀 𝗖𝗶𝗻𝗱𝘆 𝗧𝗼𝗯𝗶𝘀𝗺𝗮𝗻 𝗔𝗽𝗽𝗲𝗮𝗿𝘀 𝗕𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗻𝗶𝗮 𝗦𝘂𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁 GMSR co-managing partner Cindy Tobisman appeared yesterday before the California Supreme Court to argue for the petitioner, Michael Rattagan, in a case against Uber Technologies, Inc.  The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had asked the Court to decide whether, under California law, claims for fraudulent concealment are exempt from the economic loss rule. In the underlying case, Rattagan alleged that Uber fraudulently concealed information from him when he represented its subsidiaries during a problem-filled launch in Buenos Aires, Argentina, and that the concealed information led to him being arrested and vilified in the media.  The district court held that Rattagan's fraudulent concealment claims were foreclosed by the economic loss rule—a doctrine that prevents a party to a contract from recovering economic damages under tort liability theories—and thus, dismissed his complaint.  The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recognized that there is no controlling California precedent addressing whether fraudulent concealment claims are exempt from the economic loss rule, and the answer would be dispositive in the case, so it certified the question to the California Supreme Court. Law360 wrote about the oral argument, providing some highlights:  "There's nothing about [the doctrine] that we would want to shield people who commit fraud just because there’s a contract in the mix," Tobisman said.  "And in fact it would create some kind of perverse incentives for people to draw somebody into a contractual relationship because then they could have their way with them." The high court's decision is expected within the next 90 days. Click here to learn more: Clough, 𝘈𝘵𝘵𝘺'𝘴 𝘈𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘜𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝘋𝘦𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘍𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘓𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘈𝘵 𝘊𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘧. 𝘏𝘪𝘨𝘩 𝘊𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘵, Law360 (June 4, 2024), https://lnkd.in/gPFm75CJ (subscription required). #SupremeCourt

28

2 Comments