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

Dawn Kennedy Baker & Hostetler LLP

Results 1 to 5 of 9



California appellate court orders arbitration and rules that claims may not proceed on behalf of a class plaintiff in Macy's OT action gets what she bargained for *

USA - January 31 2013
A recent decision from a California Court of Appeals reflects a growing, if at times reluctant, acceptance by California courts of employment…


Court of Appeal turns volume down on plaintiff in meal period class action against RadioShack *

USA - December 7 2012
The California Court of Appeal has maintained the recent post-Brinker trend of refusing to certify cases involving meal and rest period claims where an employer has a compliant break policy. 


Arbitrators, not judges, must decide whether noncompetes are enforceable if there is an arbitration clause, says U.S. Supreme Court *

USA - December 5 2012
On November 26, 2012, the United States Supreme Court held that the enforceability of a noncompete agreement containing a valid arbitration clause must be determined by an arbitrator in the first instance, not by a federal or state court.

Co-authors: John Siegal, David A. Posner.


NLRB to non-union employers: we just may be the boss of you *

USA - May 4 2012
Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (the "Act") protects the rights of employees "to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection.

Co-authors: Ellen Shadur Gross.


Split Supreme Court strikes down suits against states under FMLA's self-care provision *

USA - April 24 2012
On March 20, 2012, in Coleman v. Court of Appeals of Maryland, 2012 WL 912951 (2012), a plurality of the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that States are immune from suits for damages for violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) provision that permits leave for an employee's own serious health condition.

Co-authors: Ellen Shadur Gross.


Next »