It was a chance meeting at a UC Berkeley dorm forty years ago that eventually led partners Nick Roxborough and Drew Pomerance to establish their own law firm, what is known today as Roxborough, Pomerance, Nye & Adreani LLP (RPNA). Few law firms are founded on friendships and fewer sustain a solid forty-year relationship. It was for this reason,…Details
On Saturday, November 12, 2016, attorney Drew E. Pomerance will be speaking at the prestigious California Attorneys Association of California’s annual conference. Mr. Pomerance is the managing partner of the well-respected Los Angeles law firm Roxborogh Pomerance Nye & Adreani. He recently argued one of the firm’s seminal cases before the California Supreme Court. Mr.…Details
On October 14, 2016, seasoned business litigator Drew E. Pomerance will be speaking at the Valley Industrial and Commerce Association (VICA) Business Forecast Conference at the Hilton Hotel, Universal City, California. Mr. Pomerance will join a small panel of experts to discuss how businesses can deal with and protect themselves from wage and hour and…Details
When it comes to cases against Applied Underwriters, RPNA’s Nick Roxborough is the go-to expert for commentary. Workers’ Comp Executive reached out to Nick regarding the most recent lawsuit against Berkshire Hathaway’s subsidiary filed in New York. The plaintiff is seeking a $6 million bond and at least $18 million in trebled damages.
According to a September 28 article, what makes this suit of particular interest is that it challenges the way Applied structures, sells, and operates its SolutionOne workers’ comp and payroll program. The plaintiff maintains that Applied Underwriters uses an unfiled and unapproved Reinsurance Participation Agreement (RPA) to siphon off money that should be reserved to pay claims, according to the article.Details
Roxborough Comments in Workers’ Comp Executive Article About New Oder Barring Applied Underwriters’ EquityComp Program
Workers’ Comp Executive recently reached out to Nicholas Roxborough to comment on the new cease and desist order signed by California Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones, barring Applied Underwriters from selling its EquityComp program in California. Roxborough told Workers’ Comp Executive that, “the Order provides additional evidence that Applied has engaged in wrongdoing. It provides exquisite foundational evidence for existing lawsuits,…Details
It is time to carefully review arbitration agreements and class action waivers.
A few days ago the California Supreme Court delivered its highly anticipated ruling in the Sandquist v. Lebo Automotive case on the issue of whether it is the court or the arbitrator who decides whether an employment law case can proceed as a class action, or whether the plaintiff can only proceed on an individual basis.
Sandquist was filed as a discrimination claim by an employee who pled both individual and class claims against his employer. The plaintiff employee had signed an arbitration agreement. The defendant employer filed a motion to compel arbitration, and dismiss the class action.Details
In a recent Workers’ Comp Executive article, RPNA co-managing partner Nick Roxborough was asked to comment on California Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones’ decision regarding Applied Underwriters’ EquityComp Program. Roxborough said he wouldn’t be surprised if Applied Underwriters’ certificate is eventually pulled stating that the decision “effectively kills the program in California as it exists now.” The RPA (reinsurance participation…Details
RPNA co-managing partner, Nick Roxborough, was honored by United Cerebral Palsy of Los Angeles at the 20th Annual UCP Golf Tournament on June 6. More than 300 people attended the tournament and gala dinner that followed, raising approximately $400,000 for the organization.
As the former President of the Spastic Children’s Endowment Foundation, having served as the Chairman of the Board of Directors and currently winding up his term as Chairman of the Board of Governors, Nick has been deeply committed to supporting the UCP Family and their mission for the last 28 years.
A highlight of the evening was a special video tribute to Nick by Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, who acknowledged Nick’s accomplishments and impact on the city of Los Angeles:Details
For the first time since 2005, the United States Department of Labor has issued an updated regulation automatically extending overtime pay eligibility to 4.2 million “white collar” workers previously exempted from the Fair Labor Standards Act overtime pay requirements. The updated regulation is almost certain to swell payroll costs and increase wage and hour lawsuits.
Under the current regulations, a “white collar” worker, otherwise meeting the standard duties test to be considered exempt from overtime, must be paid a salary of $455 per week ($23,660 annually for a full-year worker). The updated regulation more than doubled the minimum salary required for an employee to be exempt from overtime (to $913 per week, $47,476 annually for a full-year worker).Details
Sandquist v. Lebo Automotive Inc. may seem like a typical employment lawsuit. However, it involves a very significant issue that has now been taken up to the California Supreme Court for resolution. The issue is who determines whether a class claim may be brought and heard before an arbitrator—the court or the arbitrator itself —when the arbitration agreement is unclear or silent as to whether class claims may be brought through arbitration. The high court’s ruling will potentially affect all employers.
The underlying facts of the Sandquist case revolve around a discrimination claim by an employee, pled as both individual and class claims. The plaintiff had signed an arbitration agreement, and as such, the defendant filed a motion to compel arbitration, which was granted by the court. Of significance is the court’s ruling that the plaintiff was bound to an individual arbitration claim and could not pursue a class claim at all.Details
With the prevalence of class action lawsuits in an employee-friendly state like California, employers must be aware of proper time card rounding policies and what work is being conducted off the clock by their employees.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal recently issued a pro-employer decision approving the use of time card rounding and solidifying the application of the de minimis rule in California.Details
The issue of reimbursable expenses is often a hot topic amongst employees and their employers. While it seems obvious, for example, that an employee who uses his personal car to perform a work ‘errand’ will be reimbursed for his mileage, it is not often so cut and dry. What about the technician who buys his own truck, the gardener who purchases his own tools, or the production worker who purchases his own uniform? Are these reimbursable expenses for the employee? One of the most common alleged wage and labor violations involves disgruntled employees claiming they were not properly reimbursed for business expenses.
The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) establishes minimum wage and overtime pay for employees in the private sector and in Federal, State, and local governments. Additionally, the FLSA requires that employers pay an employee’s wages finally and unconditionally. If an employee is required to return some portion of wages—whether directly or indirectly (such as through purchasing his own supplies, gas, etc…)—and that “kickback” puts the employee’s hourly rate below the minimum wage, then the employer has violated the FLSA’s minimum wage requirement.Details