For reprint rights or to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices or call 949-702-5390.

To buy more copies, call 866-531-1492 or email subscribe@dailyjournal.com
This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Civil Procedure

Nov. 15, 2023

The relation back doctrine and PAGA

Practitioners may wish to consider if the relation back doctrine applies to PAGA claims. The court in Hutcheson v. Superior Court, 74 Cal. App. 5th 932 (2022), addressed this very question.

Robin G. Workman

Partner
Workman Law Firm PC

177 Post St
San Francisco , CA 94108

Phone: (415) 782-3660

Fax: (415) 788-1028

Email: robin@workmanlawpc.com

Texas Tech Univ SOL; Lubbock TX

See more...

The time between submitting a notice of alleged violations to the Labor & Workforce Development Agency (LWDA), as required by section 2699.3(a) of the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (the "PAGA"), and resolution or trial continues to increase. In the interim, life does not stop. Employees who submit the original PAGA notice cease to work for the employer, die, or simply decide they no longer want to continue the litigation. In the interim, new claims can al...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?

Enewsletter Sign-up

Related Content

Employment Law

Hutcheson v. Superior Court (UBS Financial Services)

The relation-back doctrine can apply when substituting named plaintiffs in a Private Attorneys General Act action.

statutory_interpretation

Kim v. Reins International California Inc.

Settlement of individual claims does not strip aggrieved employee of standing as the state's authorized representative to pursue PAGA remedies.

Labor Law

Brown v. Ralphs Grocery Company et al.

Plaintiff's notice under Labor Code Section 2699.3(a) was not adequate except for one allegation because it was a string of legal conclusions and did not allege 'facts and theories.'

Employment Law

Hargrove v. Legacy Healthcare, Inc.

Plaintiff could not be substituted as the representative Private Attorneys General Act plaintiff after the original plaintiff died since she did not satisfy the legislative prerequisites ...

Labor Law

Johnson v. Maxim Healthcare Services, Inc.

Although plaintiff's individual claim was time-barred, she may still pursue representative claim under Private Attorney General Act.



By using our website, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. You can learn more about how we use cookies by reviewing our Privacy Policy here.