Photo of Brendan J. Begley

Brendan is a shareholder who spearheads the firm’s Appeals and Writs group and is a member of the firm’s litigation, labor and employment, and trust, probate and elder-abuse litigation groups. He is an Appellate Law Specialist certified by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization.

As the national controversy continues to swirl around immigration issues, a federal appellate court this week faulted an employer for demanding that an employee provide information to prove “‘legal right to work in the United States … as required by the Immigration Control and Reform Act of 1986.’”  The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (“Ninth Circuit”) ruled in Santillan v. USA Waste of California, Inc., Case No. No. 15-55238, that Gilberto Santillan — a 53-year-old, Spanish-speaking garbage truck driver — did not have to “provide proof of employment eligibility.”

The appellate court said that was so because Santillan, who had worked for the employer for 32 years, had been fired and then reinstated shortly before his employer required him to provide such proof.  It may come as a surprise to employers to learn that an employee who is fired and then reinstated may not have to prove his or her eligibility to work in the U.S. upon reinstatement, but that is the case under federal law. Brenden-Begley-05_web
Continue Reading Requiring Employees to Prove Eligibility to Work in the U.S. Can Lead to Liability

In a decision just two weeks after Valentine’s Day, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (“Ninth Circuit”) has ruled that hugs and kisses may decrease, rather than increase, feelings of affection in the workplace.  Specifically, the Ninth Circuit overturned a lower court decision dismissing a lawsuit filed by a county correctional officer who alleged

The United States Supreme Court decided last week to resolve a split in the lower courts as to whether the National Labor Relations Act (“Act”) preempts class-action waiver clauses in arbitration agreements between employers and their employees.  This is an important development, as the use of such waivers in arbitration agreements (if permissible) can drastically