State Employment Law Articles

In Reliable Fire Equipment Company v. Arrendondo [pdf], discussed here, the Supreme Court of Illinois dramatically altered how protectable legitimate business interests in noncompetition agreements were to be reviewed under Illinois law, clarifying what it felt were decades of misapplication. On Feb

Effective immediately, businesses in Georgia can save themselves the expense of using legal counsel to file routine garnishment answers. The new law, signed by Governor Nathan Deal on February 7, 2012, allows businesses to appoint an “authorized officer or employee” to file such answers and decl

On February 8, 2012, the Washington Legislature passed SB 6239 to legalize same-sex marriage in Washington State. Governor Christine Gregoire has announced she will sign the bill on February 13. Meanwhile, opponents have promised to gather enough signatures to force a referendum on the law.

On February 7, 2012, in a 2-1 decision a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in Perry v. Brown that Proposition 8, a voter initiative that amended the California Constitution to provide, "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized i

Indiana joins Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia and Wyoming as states where forced unionism is prohibited. Several other s

Indiana’s new right-to-work law amends the Indiana Code to prohibit collective bargaining agreements that would require workers to pay union dues or fees. The new law, signed by Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels on February 1, 2012, applies to any written or oral contract or agreement entered into, m

On March 1, 2012 the minimum wage for employers in Santa Fe, New Mexico will increase to $10.29 per hour.

On January 23, 2012, the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) announced on its website1 modifications to the answers to two of its Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs), and added 10 new FAQs and answers concerning the wage notice required by the California Wage Theft Prevention Act

In a matter of significance for California employers, in See’s Candy Shops, Inc. v. Superior Court of San Diego, the California Supreme Court recently ordered the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, to review a trial court decision holding that rounding employee time entries vio

On January 24, 2012, the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, issued an important decision providing new and needed guidance on the commissioned sales exemption. In Muldrow v. Surrex Solutions Corporation, the court concluded that a class of “senior consulting service managers”

On January 9, 2012, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie signed into law the New Jersey Trade Secrets Act, which establishes principles governing protection of trade secrets and remedies for their misappropriation. In doing so, New Jersey has joined the mainstream in the trade secrets arena: New York,

A provision in an employment application requiring the applicant, but not the employer, to submit all disputes to arbitration was both procedurally and substantively unconscionable, and therefore unenforceable, the California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, has ruled. Wisdom v. AccentCare

Joining the vast majority of jurisdictions in the country, New Jersey has enacted a law to protect trade secrets. The New Jersey Trade Secrets Act (“NJTSAâ€), signed by Governor Chris Christie on January 9, 2012, is a version of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (“UTSAâ€). A total of 47 states have

In Best Medical International, Inc. v. Spellman, a federal court in Pennsylvania determined—in a case of first impression—that attorneys' fees may be awarded to the prevailing defending party under the Pennsylvania Uniform Trade Secrets Act ("PUTSA") when it has demonstrated:

In the waning days of 2011, a unanimous California Supreme Court gave California employers a holiday present in its long-awaited opinion that diminishes the importance of the outmoded analytical tool known as "the administrative/production worker dichotomy" for determining whether employees are prop

In Arnold v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance Company, a California appellate court issued a published decision holding that insurance agents are not employees under the California Labor Code. This appears to be the first time the court has addressed the status of insurance agents.

When may attorneys’ fees be imposed on a plaintiff for prosecuting a claim for misappropriation of trade secrets in bad faith under the Pennsylvania Uniform Trade Secrets Act (PUTSA)? In a matter of first impression, in Best Medical International v. Spellman [pdf], a Pennsylvania district court he

In a case of first impression, the California Court of Appeal has clarified the scope of an employer’s obligation to pay reporting time and split shift premiums under the California Industrial Welfare Commission’s Wage Order No. 4-2001 (“Wage Order”). The Court ruled that an employee was not

Sidestepping its first opportunity to address California’s overtime exemption for administrative employees, the state Supreme Court has ruled that although the court of appeal misapplied the “administrative/production worker dichotomy,” the case should be remanded for analysis under the applic

An invasion-of-privacy claim against an insurance agent brought by his former employee should proceed even where the surveillance camera in the workplace’s unisex bathroom was faulty, the Iowa Supreme Court has ruled. Koeppel v. Speirs, No. 08-1927.