©2024 Seyfarth Shaw LLP www.seyfarth.com 2024 Cal-Peculiarities | 153 528 Lab. Code § 244(b) (employer engages in “adverse employment action” for purposes of establishing a violation of rights if employer, in retaliation for the exercise of California statutory rights, reports to a government agency the “suspected citizenship or immigration status” of either the employee, former employee, or prospective employee, or a member of that individual’s family). 529 Lab. Code § 1019.2 (violations trigger penalties of up to $10,000, recoverable by the Labor Commissioner). 530 California Providing Free Legal Services for Undocumented Farmworkers, Office of Governor Gavin Newsom, published July 19, 2023; https://www.gov.ca.gov/2023/07/19/california-providing-free-legal-services-for-undocumented-farmworkers/ (last visited Mar. 21, 2024). 531 AB 450, codified in Gov’t Code §§ 7285.1, 7285.2, 7285.3, and Labor Code §§ 90.2, 1019.2. 532 The statutes regulate information-sharing and conditions in state detention facilities housing noncitizens (AB 103 and SB 54) and limit the cooperation that California employers may provide to federal immigration enforcement agents (AB 450). 533 United States v. California, 314 F. Supp. 3d 1077, 1112 (E.D. Cal. 2018). The U.S. government appealed, and the district court was reversed in one respect that did not involve employment issues. United States v. California, 921 F.3d 865 (9th Cir. 2019). 534 SB 785, 2018 bill adding Evid. Code §§ 351.3, 351.4. The law had a January 1, 2022 sunset date. SB 785—enacted with immediate effect on May 17, 2018—responded to ICE arrests of immigrants in California courthouses, despite the March 2017 admonition of California Chief Justice, Tani Cantil-Sakauye that “[o]ur courthouses serve as a vital forum for ensuring access to justice and protecting public safety. Courthouses should not be used as bait in the necessary enforcement of our country’s immigration laws.” On August 23, 2022, California Governor Newsom signed into law SB 836 which removed the January 1, 2022 sunset date, making the protections of Evid. Code §§ 351.3 and 351.4 permanent. 535 Costco Wholesale Corp. v. Superior Ct., 47 Cal. 4th 725 (2009). 536 Id. at 736-40. 537 Coito v. Superior Ct., 54 Cal. 4th 480 (2012). 538 Id. at 485-86. 539 Id. at 502 (calling for trial court to conduct in camera inspection to see if absolute or qualified work product protection should apply). 540 Id. at 486 (“[W]e hold that the recorded witness statements are entitled as a matter of law to at least qualified work product protection. The witness statements may be entitled to absolute protection if defendant can show that disclosure would reveal its ‘attorney's impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal research or theories.’”). 541 Id. at 499 (“A party seeking disclosure has the burden of establishing that denial of disclosure will unfairly prejudice the party in preparing its claim or defense or will result in an injustice.”); see, e.g., Palo Verde Unified Sch. Dist. v. Superior Ct., No. E079300, 2023 WL 116729, at *7 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 6, 2023) (unpublished) (finding no unfair prejudice because plaintiffs “have not suggested, let alone explained, how they have been prevented from ascertaining the identity of any percipient witnesses or [were] prevented from conducting their own interviews or depositions of such witnesses”). 542 Id. at 499-500 (remanding matter for finding whether absolute protection applies to all or part of the recorded witness interviews). 543 Wellpoint Health Networks, Inc. v. Superior Ct., 59 Cal. App. 4th 110, 123 (1997). 544 City of Petaluma v. Superior Ct., 248 Cal. App. 4th 1023, 1035 (2016). 545 Lisec v. United Air Lines, Inc., 10 Cal. App. 4th 1500, 1507 (1992). 546 Cifuentes v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 238 Cal. App. 4th 65, 77 (2015). 547 Id. at 76. 548 Lu v. Hawaiian Gardens Casino, Inc., 50 Cal. 4th 592, 603-04 (2010) (“To the extent that an employee may be entitled to certain misappropriated gratuities, we see no apparent reason why other remedies, such as a common law action for conversion, may not be available under appropriate circumstances.”). 549 Voris v. Lampert, 7 Cal. 5th 1141, 1156-58 (2019) (claims for unpaid wages resemble other actions for particular amounts of money owed in exchange for contractual performance—a type of claim that has long been understood to sound in contract, rather than as the tort of conversion). 550 Id. at 1163-70. 551 Lacagnina v. Comprehend Sys., Inc., 25 Cal. App. 5th 955, 972 (2018) (sustaining grant of nonsuit against “wage theft” claim under Penal Code section 496(c): “If every plaintiff in an employment or contract dispute could also seek treble damages and attorneys’ fees on the ground that the defendant received ‘stolen property,’ such claims would become the rule rather than the exception, parties would more frequently assert claims for ‘theft’ in run-of-the-mill commercial disputes, and cases would be harder to settle. We cannot believe the Legislature contemplated, much less intended, those consequences when it enacted section 496, subdivision (c).”).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTkwMTQ4