As a young law student back in in 1987, I read an article about "human rights violations" being perpetrated by Israel in the National Law Review. Never a shrinking violet, I dashed off a letter to the editor in protest. A couple of days after it was printed, two letters arrived in my law school mailbox, both of them antisemitic and threatening. I was a bit spooked, so I called the Chicago office of the Anti-Defamation League.
The majority’s creative interpretation of the line between fact and opinion creates a slippery slope that will undoubtedly be used by defendants to obscure the protected opinion doctrine in their favor.
A Los Angeles employment lawyer facing ethics charges over tweets she made in May 2020 during Black Lives Matter protests in the wake of the killing of George Floyd said the California state bar's disciplinary action against her must be dropped because the "enshrined" free speech rights of Golden State attorneys "depend on it."
The EDD is accusing some pandemic-era claimants of fraud and demanding repayment, years after their applications were approved. In some cases, current wages are being garnished to claw back the unemployment money, even before appeals are filed.
The YouTube personality "Nate the Lawyer" fought to preserve his defamation case against a New Jersey-based social media watchdog in a motion on Monday, arguing that he is the victim of online smearing and maintaining that his suit has met the pleading requirements for defamation.
Tampa, Fla. –– The Dhillon Law Group (@dhillonlaw) obtained a multi-million-dollar judgment for its client, Michael Reiterman, in a high-profile cyberstalking and defamation lawsuit.
I can hear the libertarian rejoinder. Banning vaccine mandates is coercion. But the law is full of restraints and protections. Employers cannot make hiring decisions based on race, sex, sexual preferences, disability status, and an ever-growing list of protected classes. And there is no serious call in the conservative movement to end employment discrimination laws.
That's why experts are skeptical of the new law. John-Paul Deol, Partner and Head of Employment Law at Dhillon Law Group Inc., is one of them. He thinks California workers already have plenty of protections under existing state and federal wage-and-hours laws. Thus, it's hard to see what the new law does to improve the situation.
"It is very unclear what benefit this new law adds to existing law, except to increase costs and bureaucracy," he told International Business Times in an email.
Instead, he sees the new law hurting the Golden State's businesses, especially the fast-food restaurant industry, where he thinks the $22/hour wage will force companies to leave the state or hike prices. "If businesses do not leave the state, you can bet that they will pass the high labor costs onto consumers, worsening the harm already done by inflation."
Attorney Advertising