This week's show regards three major recent rulings, one on the contours of specific personal jurisdiction, one on a Los Angeles wage order courting NLRA preemption, and one resolving an uncertain real estate law issue on statutes of limitation application to quiet title actions against 'void ab initio' legal instruments.
First, Sharon Arkin (Arkin Law Firm) joins to chat about
Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court, a case from the Cal. Supreme Court broadly construing specific personal jurisdiction. Ms. Arkin penned am amicus brief for the real parties in interest and considers the state high court's latest interpretation of the doctrine.
Then Michael Newman (Hinshaw & Culbertson) discusses the Ninth Circuit's ruling in a recent case considering whether a citywide wage ordinance pertaining to hotel workers, which had an exemption for unionized workers, should have been preempted by the NLRA. The panel held it should not be so preempted; Mr. Newman isn't as sure.
Finally, Gerry Mooney (Rutan & Tucker) chats a recent Fourth District real estate ruling, which resolved an uncertain question of property law; namely, whether statutes of limitation apply in quiet title actions challenging legal instruments that were 'void ab initio.'
Don't forget to find the link below and complete a short true/false test for one hour of CLE credit. And, if you have an idea for the show or would like to be a guest, contact me at brian_cardile@dailyjournal.com
