Ad Astra Law Group, LLP

Governor Approves PAGA Reform Proposal

The California Employee Civil Action Law Initiative was removed from the November 2024 ballot after Newsom and the state Congress, including the proponents of the initiative, reached a compromise. Initially, the original initiative dares to repeal the PAGA 2004 and replace it with the new law that would be known as the “Fair Pay and Employer Accountability Act”. However, upon withdrawal of the initiative from the November 2024 Ballot, the Office of the Governor announces the following PAGA reform proposal, agreed upon by the Governor and the proponents/supporters of the aforementioned initiative. Essentially, the PAGA reform proposal includes three key features:

New system of relief
- Employers who are more proactive in complying with the labor code are treated with more grace (i.e. receives capped or lower penalties) than those who willfully violate Labor Codes.
- Increased penalty allows higher compensation for the damaged/wrong parties; the employees receive 25-35% of the penalty.
- In addition to monetary relief, the court can now grant injunctive relief to compel businesses to address/fix their violations.
Efficient resolution process
- Wronged employee must now bring in their own claim.
- The scope of Labor Codes was expanded to allow business, especially small employers, to address more issues through LWDA instead of through aggressive litigation.
- To prevent prolonged litigation, the employers can request for early evaluation and stay of the court proceeding, and the court may limit the scope of claims.
Stronger state enforcement
- DIR can expedite their hiring process so they can address claims more efficiently.

Major Win Against Fraudulent Transfer Case

In a huge win, Ad Astra prevailed on a motion for summary judgment in a fraudulent transfer action. Our client has a judgment against him individually for claims involving a real estate transaction. His family has an irrevocable trust that holds most of the client’s family’s assets. He created the trust when his wife was alive and began the process before the claims in the real estate matter arose. The client and his wife completed the trust after the client’s and the judgment creditor’s claims were filed. Upon her death, the trust became irrevocable. The client’s wife sadly died of cancer during the pendency of the real estate arbitration, and it was her wish that her family’s assets be protected for their four children. Ultimately, the arbitrator found against the client who now has a judgment against him personally, but not his trust. He is neither the trustee nor the beneficiary of the irrevocable trust. He has a life estate in the home he resides in, but otherwise no interest in the trust. Those facts did not stop an aggressive plaintiff’s counsel from bringing the action.

In an effort to collect on its judgment from the arbitration, the judgment creditor first recorded abstracts of judgment from the underlying real estate arbitration on properties owned by the trust. Then, the creditor filed a separate lawsuit against the client claiming that he had transferred his assets to the family trust to avoid his obligations. Ad Astra conducted discovery and deposed the CEO of the judgment creditor. It became clear that the judgment creditor had nothing more than pure speculation as to why the client transferred the family’s property to an irrevocable trust. Using discovery responses and deposition testimony, Ad Astra was able to prove that there was no issue of fact to decide at trial since the judgment creditor plaintiff admittedly had no evidence. Pure speculation and conjecture will not a summary judgment motion overcome. The client is overjoyed at this milestone on his path to putting his disputes behind him. As for Ad Astra, we live for great results like this one!

Implied Dedication of Real Property Subject of Three-Day Trial (in Santa Clara County)

Partner Geoffrey Murry recently tried a case in Santa Clara County Superior Court on the issue of implied public dedication of a portion of a client’s residential property in Saratoga, California. During a three-day bench trial, the parties presented evidence regarding use of the property as a public-access trail in the years prior to 1972, the early-1960s construction of the subdivision in which the property is located, planning commission requirements in advance of approval of a subdivision map, and other interesting details about the charming San Jose suburb dating back more than 50 years. It was a great experience for Geoffrey, who welcomes every opportunity to represent clients in unusual real estate-related disputes, particularly relating to use and occupation of property by third parties.

Opinion Roundup: California District Courts and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, July 2014 through February 2015 – Part Two

Author: Scripta Ad Astra Staff

This is the second part of a two part-series on federal district court opinions in California regarding the CFAA. The first part of this series can be found here.

NetApp, Inc. v. Nimble Storage, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11406 (N.D. Cal. January 29, 2015)(“NetApp II”)

Judge: Lucy H. Koh, United States District Judge

NSF Funds New UCLA Cybersecurity Research Center and Other News

Author: Scripta Ad Astra Staff

NSF Funds New UCLA Cybersecurity Research Center
In news not necessarily related to the law, UCLA just announced that it is starting a cybersecurity research center, thanks to a grant by the National Science Foundation. The Center for Encrypted Functionalities opened on Thursday, July 31, 2014, and is funded by a five-year, $5 million grant from theNSF’s Secure and Trustworthy Cyberspace program. The center is a collaboration among researchers at UCLA, Stanford University, Columbia University, the University of Texas at Austin and Johns Hopkins University. As a proud alumnus, I am happy to hear that UCLA is taking a leading role in developing cybersecurity solutions.

S.D.N.Y. Affirms Order To Microsoft To Hand Over Data Stored Overseas Pursuant To A Stored Communications Act Warrant

Author: Scripta Ad Astra Staff

On Thursday, July 31, 2014, Microsoft lost a challenge to an April 25, 2014 order denying its motion to quash a subpoena issued by the federal government pursuant to the Stored Communications Act (“SCA”) for email communications located on Microsoft servers in the Ireland. Issuing her ruling from the bench, U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska stated that “Congress intended in this statute for ISPs to produce information under their control, albeit stored abroad, to law enforcement in the United States … As [Magistrate Judge James Francis IV] found, it is a question of control, not a question of the location of that information.”

Luckily for Microsoft, Judge Preska stayed the implementation of her ruling so that Microsoft could appeal to the Second Circuit. While we wait for that to occur, it might be worthwhile to go back and examine what Judge Francis’ April 25, 2014 Order said.

Federal Judge Rules Against NCAA In Antitrust Lawsuit

Author: Wendy Hillger & Scripta Ad Astra Staff

It has been a little over a week since U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken of the Northern District of California issued her August 8, 2014 landmark ruling against the National Collegiate Athletic Association (“NCAA”) in O’Bannon v. NCAA. While it is too early to know the ramifications of the ruling (the NCAA has already stated it will appeal), the opinion has roundly been seen as favorable for collegiate athletes.

How The Challenge Started
The road to get to this ruling did not start with the lead plaintiff, former UCLA basketball star, Ed O’Bannon, simply filing suit. Rather, Mr. O’Bannon stood on the accomplishments of an evolution in public opinion and challenges that chipped away at the NCAA’s “defense of amateurism”.

The challenge to NCAA’s reign was, in part, started by the very man who helped commercialize college sports, Sonny Vaccaro. After spending decades building endorsement relationships between shoe companies such as Nike, Adidas, and Reebok, with universities all over the country, Mr. Vaccaro eventually soured on what he saw as colleges taking advantage of athletes. While universities and the NCAA were making money hand-over-fist from merchandising, television rights, and other endorsement deals, they were withholding those revenues from the athletes (called “student-athletes” by the NCAA for the purposes of avoiding paying workers compensation insurance), suggesting that these athletes were playing as students and amateurs, not professionals, and thus not entitled to that money.

Ninth Circuit Finds That FedEx Drivers Are Employees and Not Independent Contractors

Author: Scripta Ad Astra Staff

An interesting opinion in Alexander v. FedEx came out of the Ninth Circuit on Wednesday holding that FedEx drivers and delivery people were improperly classified as independent contractors instead of employees because of the level of control that FedEx maintains over those drivers. I find the opinion “interesting” because I never would have thought the people driving in the FedEx branded trucks, FedEx branded uniforms, using FedEx technology, delivering packages to FedEx customers in areas designated by FedEx, on FedEx’s schedule, would have been classified as anything other than an employee.

Ninth Circuit Affirms That Yelp! Can Use Hardball Sales Tactics To Sell Advertising To Businesses

Author: Scripta Ad Astra Staff

On Tuesday, the Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court ruling in Levitt v. Yelp! Inc. dismissing an action by a group of small businesses that Yelp! extorted, or used extortionate sales tactics, to induce small businesses to purchase advertising with Yelp! in violation of the federal Hobbs Act (civil extortion) and the California Unfair Competition Law. The plaintiffs generally claimed that Yelp! sales people contacted them about purchasing advertising services in connection with their Yelp! pages. When the plaintiffs declined to purchase the advertising, the plaintiffs alleged that Yelp! manipulated its service to lead to a downgrade in the businesses ratings. The plaintiffs alleged that such tactics included removing positive reviews, re-posting negative reviews that had previously been taken down, allowing more negative reviews to appear first, and even authored negative reviews.

Back to School Special on Estate Plans

Author: Katy M. Young

As summer comes to an end and we all go back to school in one form or another, it is time to revisit the good old to-do list. Is an estate plan on your to-do list? If you are a business owner, an estate plan that addresses business succession is critically important. If you own a home, the only way to avoid probate is by creating a trust. If you have children, an estate plan is the only way to ensure your control over who becomes your child’s guardian should anything happen to you. Ad Astra Law Group, LLP is offering a back to school special on estate plans completed in August and September 2014.

What is an estate plan? Ad Astra Law Group, LLP offers a comprehensive estate plan package that will protect you, your loved ones, and your assets should tragedy strike. We’ll prepare a trust and a will to address what happens when you pass away. We also create advance health care directives and powers of attorney to protect you in case you become incapacitated. Our lawyers will educate you about the process, guide you through tough decisions, and perform a signing ceremony with a notary to complete the estate plan package. The whole process takes about a month from start to finish.

The attorney fees for probate cases are set by law and are quite high, plus the probate process can take as long as a year or more. For most people, we can create a comprehensive estate plan for about 1/3 of the minimum probate attorney fee and save you the hassle of dealing with probate while grieving. For estate plans completed in August and September 2014, we are offering a 20% discount. Creating your estate plan will bring you peace of mind and it is a great investment in your family’s future. Contact us today to discuss your estate planning needs!