390 | 2023 Cal-Peculiarities ©2023 Seyfarth Shaw LLP www.seyfarth.com 6 ALRB v. Superior Court (Pandol & Sons), 16 Cal. 3d 392 (1976). 7 Cedar Point Nursery v. Shiroma, 923 F.3d 524, 536 (9th Cir. 2019). 8 Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, No. 16-16231 (9th Cir. April 29, 2020) (Ikuta, J., dissenting). 9 Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, 594 U.S. __, 141 S. Ct. 2063 (2021). 10 Id., 141 S. Ct. at 2072. 11 Code Civ. Proc. § 527.3(b). 12 Lab. Code § 1138.1. 13 Ralphs Grocery Co. v. United Food & Commercial Workers Union Local 8, 186 Cal. App. 4th 1078 (2010), rev. granted, No. S185544 (Cal. Sept. 29, 2010). 14 Ralphs Grocery Co. v. United Food & Commercial Workers Union Local 8, 192 Cal. App. 4th 200 (2011), rev. granted, No. S191251 (Cal. April 13, 2011). 15 Ralphs Grocery Co. v. United Food & Commercial Workers Union Local 8, 55 Cal. 4th 1083 (2012). 16 Best Friends Animal Society v. Macerich Westside Pavillion Prop. LLC, 193 Cal. App. 4th 168 (2011). 17 Lab. Code § 973. 18 Gov’t Code §§ 16645-16649. 19 Chamber of Commerce of the United States v. Lockyer, 463 F.3d 1076 (9th Cir. 2006) (en banc), rev’d, 128 S. Ct. 2408 (2008). 20 Chamber of Commerce of United States v. Brown, 554 U.S. 60 (2008). But see California Grocers Ass’n v. City of Los Angeles, 52 Cal. 4th 177 (2011) (upholding ordinance requiring grocery stores to retain their former staff for 90 days after a change in ownership; ordinance was not preempted by the California Retail Food Code or the NLRA). 21 Fashion Valley Mall v. NLRB (Graphics Commc’ns Int’l Union, Local 432-M), 42 Cal. 4th 850 (2007). 22 Fashion Valley Mall, LLC v. National Labor Relations Bd., 451 F.3d 241, 242 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (certifying question to the California Supreme Court). 23 Fashion Valley Mall, 42 Cal. 4th at 869. 24 Id. at 874-75 (Chin, J., dissenting). 25 WinCo Foods, LLC v. Thayer, 2021 WL 343938, at *6-7 (Cal. 4th. Feb. 2, 2021) (unpublished) (finding that store owner could exclude petitioners from store front where property owner “open[ed] their ... stores to the public so the public can buy goods [and] do not offer their property for any other use”); Ralphs Grocery v. Victory Consultants, 17 Cal. App 5th 245 (2017) (non- labor petitioner was subject to trespass and did not have constitutional free speech right in anti-SLAPP context); Van v. Target Corp., 155 Cal. App. 4th 1375, 1391 (2007) (given that stores, store apron, and perimeter areas are not designed as public meeting places, any societal interest in using stores for exercising expressive activities did not outweigh stores’ interests in maintaining control over use of their property); Albertson’s, Inc. v. Young, 107 Cal. App. 4th 106 (2003); Costco Companies v. Gallant, 96 Cal. App. 4th 740, 745 (2002); Trader Joe’s Co. v. Progressive Campaigns, Inc., 73 Cal. App. 4th 425, 434 (1999). 26 Cnty. of Los Angeles v. Los Angeles Cnty. Employee Relations Comm’n, 56 Cal. 4th 905 (2013). 27 AB 1654 (2018 Session), codified at Lab. Code § 2699.6. 28 SB 646 (2020 Session), codified at Lab. Code § 2699.8.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTkwMTQ4