We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Wesley C. J. Ehlers Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

Results 1 to 3 of 3



Contractor must report non-obvious hazards even if it did not create them *

USA - January 19 2010
California’s First District Court of Appeal in Suarez v. Pacific Northstar Mechanical, Inc., found that Cal-OSHA provisions, Labor Code §§ 6304.5 and 6400, “impose a duty on each employer, at a multiemployer worksite, to report all non-obvious hazards about which the employer learns because its employees were exposed to them during the course of their work, even if the employer in question did not create the hazard.”

Co-authors: Amy L. Pierce, Amanda G. Alley, Robert A. James.


CA Court of Appeal finds three-arbitrator panel contract provision unenforceable *

USA - September 10 2009
In Parada v. Superior Court, 2009 DJDAR 12745 (August 27, 2009), the Fourth District Court of Appeal held an arbitration clause in contracts between an investment company and its customers requiring a three-arbitrator panel was unconscionable and therefore unenforceable where the company failed to justify it.

Co-authors: Erin C. Carroll, Amy L. Pierce, Meredith E. Nikkel.


California Supreme Court rules intentional discrimination not required for Unruh Civil Rights Actclaims involving ADA violations *

USA - June 22 2009
In Munson v. Del Taco, Inc., No. S162818, __ Cal. 4th __ (2009), issued June 11, 2009, the Supreme Court held that a plaintiff who seeks Civil Code § 52 damages for a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1999 under the Unruh Civil Rights Act is not required to prove intentional discrimination.

Co-authors: Amy L. Pierce, Greg L. Johnson, Meredith E. Nikkel.