The California Supreme Court in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (2023) 14 Cal.5th 1104 held mandatory arbitration of an employee’s individual claims against their employer doesn’t preclude the employee from pursuing in court a representative action under the Labor Code’s Private Attorneys General Act on behalf of similarly aggrieved employees. (See here and here.) The U.S. Supreme Court had earlier interpreted California law to be the opposite. (Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (2022) 213 L.Ed.2d 179 [142 S.Ct. 1906, 1925].)
The federal high court had the opportunity to overturn the Adolph rule in Uber Technologies v. Gregg and Lyft v. Seifu. Certiorari petitions were filed in both cases, where California Courts of Appeal had ruled consistently with Adolph, the state Supreme Court had made them grant-and-holds for Adolph (see here), and then dismissed review after Adolph was decided (see here). (Horvitz & Levy filed the Seifu cert petition.)
Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court denied both cert petitions. (Here, here, and here.)
Related:
