• Kimberly A. Kralowec
    Kralowec Law, P.C.
    750 Battery St., Suite 700
    San Francisco, CA 94111
    Tel: (415) 546-6800
    Fax: (415) 546-6801

September 2018

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29

« "Calif. High Court Grapples With Limitations Period in Meal-Pay Law" | Main | Recent Eleventh Circuit CAFA decision: Main Drug, Inc. v. Aetna U.S. Healthcare, Inc. and »

Friday, March 09, 2007



I'm going out on a limb and predicting a 7-0 decision one way or the other. It sure seems like they have all their wage/hour, employment and class action decisions be unanimous since Corrigan joined the court (e.g., Smith v. Superior Court, Pioneer Electronics, Friends case, the at-will case).

Kimberly A. Kralowec

Thanks, Tommy. One possibility that did occur to me was that Chief Justice George might convince the panel that the statutory language is unambiguous, that resort to legislative history materials is therefore unnecessary, and that the payment is a wage, not a penalty. His questioning was not inconsistent with such an outcome. And, statistically speaking, Chief Justice George is in the majority far more often than not.

The comments to this entry are closed.

2018 Supreme Court Calendar



  • Nothing in this blog constitutes legal advice or a solicitation for business. If you need legal advice, consult an attorney in your jurisdiction. To read this blog's complete disclaimer, click here.

  • The UCL Practitioner
    © 2003-2018
    by Kimberly A. Kralowec
    All rights reserved.

  • Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

  • Header design by Webmotion
    Photos by Jack Gescheidt
    Powered by TypePad