On December 21, 2016, Judge Judith Ryan, Ret., a JAMS Arbitrator, granted Summary Judgment for KHIP’s client, a Silicon Valley startup. The Claimant initially filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court, but the matter was compelled to Arbitration following Respondent’s motion. The Claimant, a former executive of Respondent’s technology company, claimed: (1) breach of contract; (2) breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing; (3) fraud; (4) promissory estoppel; (5) wrongful termination; (6) unjust enrichment; (7) unfair competition; and (8) negligent misrepresentation. In response to KHIP’s Motion for Summary Judgment, Claimant voluntarily dismissed his fraud and unjust enrichment claims. As to the remaining six causes of action, the Arbitrator held that there were no triable issues of material fact and Respondent was entitled to an award as a matter of law.
- Understanding FFCRA – Families First Coronavirus Response Act
- Summary Judgment Granted for KHIP client – no triable issue on discrimination claims
- A recent Court of Appeals ruling chips away at the validity of non-solicitation provisions
- Victory in Binding Labor Arbitration!
- Highlight of 2019 Laws Affecting Employers
- Workplace Harassment Claims Easier to Prove in California Following #MeToo
- Pharmacy Benefit Management Litigation Ends in Settlement
- Federal Court orders former employee’s claims preempted by LMRA, then dismisses entire action