BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//JudicialCouncil//NONSGML v1.0//EN
BEGIN:VEVENT
UID:event18742@trial.court
DTSTAMP:20260404T171209Z
DTSTART:20220301T170000Z
DTEND:20220301T223000Z
SUMMARY:Supreme Court Oral Argument for March 1, 2022
DESCRIPTION:/*(1) */*/Pulliam (Tania) v. HNL Automotive, Inc., et al., S267576 [1] /*
#21-205; Pulliam (Tania)*/ /*v. HNL Automotive, Inc., et al.,
S267576.(B293435; 60 Cal.App.5th 396; Superior Court of Los Angeles County;
BC633169.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed an order
awarding attorney fees in a civil action. This case presents the following
issue: Does the word “recovery” as used in the Holder Rule (16 C.F.R.
§ 433.2) include attorney fees?
/*(2) */*/Naranjo (Gustavo) v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., S258966
[2]/*
#20-02 Naranjo (Gustavo) v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., S258966.
(B256232; 40 Cal.App.5th 444; Superior Court of Los Angeles County;
BC372146.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed in part
and reversed in part the judgment in a civil action. This case presents the
following issues: (1) Does a violation of Labor Code section 226.7, which
requires payment of premium wages for meal and rest period violations, give
rise to claims under Labor Code sections 203 and 226 when the employer does
not include the premium wages in the employee’s wage statements but does
include the wages earned for meal breaks? (2) What is the applicable
prejudgment interest rate for unpaid premium wages owed under Labor Code
section 226.7?
/*(3) */*/People v. Padilla (Mario Salvador), S263375 [3]/*
#20-232 People v. Padilla (Mario Salvador), S263375. (B297213; 50
Cal.App.5th 244; Superior Court of Los Angeles County; TA051184.) Petition
for review after the Court of Appeal conditionally reversed a remanded a
judgment of conviction of criminal offenses. This case presents the
following issue: When a judgment becomes final, but is later vacated,
altered, or amended and a new sentence imposed, is the case no longer final
for the purpose of applying an intervening ameliorative change in the law?
/*(4) */*/People v. Parker (Calvin Lamont), [Automatic Appeal], S113962
[4]/*
This matter is an automatic appeal from a judgment of death.
[1] https://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/mainCaseScreen.cfm?dist=0&doc_id=2343350&doc_no=S267576&request_token=NiIwLSEmPkw9WyAtSCNNXEhJQEA0UDxTJSMuUz1SUCAgCg%3D%3D
[2] https://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/mainCaseScreen.cfm?dist=0&doc_id=2302546&doc_no=S258966&request_token=NiIwLSEmPkw9WyAtSCNNXE9JUEg0UDxTJiBeIzxSUCAgCg%3D%3D
[3] https://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/mainCaseScreen.cfm?dist=0&doc_id=2322764&doc_no=S263375&request_token=NiIwLSEmPkw9WyAtSCNNXE5IQFQ0UDxTJSIuSz1SICAgCg%3D%3D
[4] https://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/mainCaseScreen.cfm?dist=0&doc_id=1845641&doc_no=S113962&request_token=NiIwLSEmPkw9WyAtSCNNXE5IIEA0UDxfIiIuIzxTUCAgCg%3D%3D
X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:(1) Pulliam (Tania) v. HNL Automotive, Inc., et al., S267576
#21-205; Pulliam (Tania) v. HNL Automotive, Inc., et al., S267576.(B293435; 60 Cal.App.5th 396; Superior Court of Los Angeles County; BC633169.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed an order awarding attorney fees in a civil action. This case presents the following issue: Does the word “recovery” as used in the Holder Rule (16 C.F.R. § 433.2) include attorney fees?
(2) Naranjo (Gustavo) v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., S258966
#20-02 Naranjo (Gustavo) v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., S258966. (B256232; 40 Cal.App.5th 444; Superior Court of Los Angeles County; BC372146.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed in part and reversed in part the judgment in a civil action. This case presents the following issues: (1) Does a violation of Labor Code section 226.7, which requires payment of premium wages for meal and rest period violations, give rise to claims under Labor Code sections 203 and 226 when the employer does not include the premium wages in the employee’s wage statements but does include the wages earned for meal breaks? (2) What is the applicable prejudgment interest rate for unpaid premium wages owed under Labor Code section 226.7?
(3) People v. Padilla (Mario Salvador), S263375
#20-232 People v. Padilla (Mario Salvador), S263375. (B297213; 50 Cal.App.5th 244; Superior Court of Los Angeles County; TA051184.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal conditionally reversed a remanded a judgment of conviction of criminal offenses. This case presents the following issue: When a judgment becomes final, but is later vacated, altered, or amended and a new sentence imposed, is the case no longer final for the purpose of applying an intervening ameliorative change in the law?
(4) People v. Parker (Calvin Lamont), [Automatic Appeal], S113962
This matter is an automatic appeal from a judgment of death.
LOCATION:
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR