Featured

About Us

ESKRIDGE LAW has been in existence in Torrance since 1997. The attorneys and staff of ESKRIDGE LAW are committed to providing excellent legal representation.  The firm prides itself on strong communications with its clients.  Because of its smaller size, ESKRIDGE LAW is able to maintain individualized relationships with all its clients and to respond very quickly to client needs.  The attorneys and staff at ESKRIDGE LAW are available to answer clients’ questions and discuss their needs and concerns on a daily basis.  ESKRIDGE LAW’s clients know the status of their cases at all times.

Both ESKRIDGE LAW and Gayle L. Eskridge have held an AV rating from Martindale-Hubbell every year since 2001.  An AV rating identifies a lawyer or firm with very high to preeminent legal ability.  The AV rating is a reflection of expertise, experience, integrity and overall professional excellence.  Ms. Eskridge has also been designated a Martindale-Hubbell Top Rated Lawyer in Litigation every year since 2015, and a Martindale-Hubbell Labor and Employment Law Top Rated Lawyer every year since 2015.  Ms. Eskridge has also been designated a Martindale Hubbell Women’s AV Preeminent Attorney every year since 2011.

Ms. Eskridge has been designated a California Super Lawyer for every year since 2012. (Only 5% of all attorneys in Southern California ever receive such a distinction.)

Ms. Eskridge has also been designated as one of the Best Lawyers in America. Best Lawyers is regarded – by both the legal profession and the public – as one of the most credible measures of legal integrity and distinction in the United States. Inclusion in Best Lawyers symbolizes excellence in practice.

Ms. Eskridge has also been designated a Top Attorney in Southern California by Los Angeles Magazine.  Ms. Eskridge has also been selected a California Top Ten Attorney in the Litigation, Lawsuits & Disputes Division by the American Institute of Legal Counsel.

Ms. Eskridge has been designated as one of America’s Most Honored Professionals – Top 1% in every year since 2011.  She has also been designated one of the Top Women Attorneys in Southern California every year since 2012.

REPRESENTATIVE CASES

Business and Real Estate:

Among ESKRIDGE LAW’s victories in business and real estate disputes are the following:

2018

  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully settled a real estate fraud case on behalf of its client (the defendant)

2016

  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully settled a partition action on behalf of its client (the defendant).
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully settled an action claiming real estate fraud on behalf of its client (the defendant).
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a settlement of over $250,000 on behalf of tenants of two apartments which were damaged by water.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW represented a veterinary practice in the successful purchase of its office building.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully settled a breach of contract and fraud case among owners of a company.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully defended an unlawful detainer action.

2015

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained $375,000 on behalf of its clients in a shareholder derivative action.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully settled a partition action on behalf of its client (the plaintiff).
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully settled a claim regarding allegations of damage to real property.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully settled an ADA access claim brought against one of its retail business clients for only $4,000.

2014

  • ESKRIDGE LAW convinced an insurance company to pay $235,000 to resolve a case on behalf of one of its real estate clients.

2013

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained settlements totaling $15,500 from two defendants, and a default judgment of over $600,000 from a third defendant in a real estate fraud case.

2012

  • ESKRIDGE LAW succeeded in settling a dispute involving an HOA for $45,000, plus some non-monetary items which were greatly appreciated by the clients.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW succeeded in obtaining a full dismissal of its client (the seller) in a real estate litigation matter.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW succeeded in preventing a lawsuit in a real estate “failure to disclose” case in a settlement which involved its client (the seller of an apartment complex) paying only $12,500.

2011

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $44,000 judgment in a business litigation matter after only a few months of litigation.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a mistrial in a matter involving an 11,000 acre ranch, and obtained a favorable settlement involving the transfer of certain property shortly afterward.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully resolved an ADA construction access lawsuit.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $130,000 pre-litigation settlement for a client in a stock dispute involving convertible debentures.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully defended the owner of commercial property regarding ADA access issues.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW represented a client in the sale of her tree trimming business.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully prevented the owner of commercial property from being criminally prosecuted related to land use violations.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW assisted the buyers of a residential property in forcing reluctant sellers to proceed with closing escrow.

2010

  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully settled a partition action involving an income property in Gardena.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully quashed a real estate fraud lawsuit which had been brought against ten of its clients.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW provided legal advice which was successful in preventing many of its business clients from being sued.

2009

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a dismissal of a $38 million loan fraud case against its client.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a judgment of $479,341 in a shareholder derivative action.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully resolved a partition action involving three apartment buildings.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully defended a major non-profit corporation which had been accused of allowing one of its employees to sexually harass a consumer.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully settled a breach of contract action against a local non-profit corporation.

2008

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained $150,000 in a shareholder derivative action.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained $55,000 for a small business in breach of contract case.

2007

  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully prevented numerous of its business clients from being sued.

2006

  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully represented two plaintiffs in a fraud/breach of contract/partition action involving two residential properties and seven investment properties.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully defended the owners of a residential property against an action for breach of contract and fraud. ESKRIDGE LAW succeeded in obtaining a court order expunging the lis pendens, after which the case quickly settled.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully represented the plaintiff in an action for specific performance of a contract to purchase real property, despite the fact that the contract was never signed by the owner of the property.  Today, ESKRIDGE LAW’s client is residing peacefully at the property.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully defended the majority shareholders of a local electronics company in complex business litigation involving numerous claims and cross-claims.  A settlement which involved buying out the interests of the minority shareholder was ultimately achieved.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW represented the defendant in a declaratory relief action and, after prevailing on a motion for summary judgment, received a settlement of $33,500 in favor of its client – the defendant.

2005

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a settlement of $75,000 on behalf of a would-be buyer whose real estate agent/loan broker falsely represented to the buyer that her loan application had been denied, then secretly purchased the property for himself.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW represented local associations of realtors in numerous business, employment, and real estate matters.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully represented the plaintiff in a partition action.  As the result of a settlement achieved at mediation, the defendant purchased plaintiff’s share of the property at the current market value.

2004

  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully handled the sale of a Palos Verdes property on behalf of the seller.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully represented a home health corporation in litigation against one of its former directors and officers involving eleven different causes of action.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully represented the buyers of a major floral store in Orange County.

2003

  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully represented the sellers in the sale of a machinery manufacturing company.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW achieved summary judgment in a construction defect case in Los Angeles Superior Court.

2002

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a cost award of $156,000 in favor of Defendant Velur Investments II, Inc. in a competition case brought by Roland Land Investments, Inc.

2001

  • ESKRIDGE LAW prevailed at trial in a real estate matter in Orange County Superior Court, on behalf of plaintiffs.

2000

  • ESKRIDGE LAW helped numerous clients to avoid litigation by taking preemptive measures and by quickly resolving any disputes which arose.

1999

  • ESKRIDGE LAW prevailed in a real estate case which was tried to a jury in Torrance Superior Court on behalf of plaintiffs.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained the dismissal of a case against its client by filing a motion for summary judgment.
  • A Torrance jury awarded $1.5 million to ESKRIDGE LAW’s clients in a stock fraud case against a local real estate broker.

1998

  • ESKRIDGE LAW prevailed in a jury trial in Kern County Superior Court, representing property owners who were sued by an RTC-controlled company.  The company sought to rescind a contract for the sale of 11,000 acres.  Not only did the jury rule in favor of ESKRIDGE LAW’s clients as to the ownership of the entire 11,000 acres — the jury also awarded ESKRIDGE LAW’s clients $300,000 on their cross-claim.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW prevailed in a bench trial in Torrance Superior Court, representing an interior designer who sued a former client for non-payment.

Employee:

Among ESKRIDGE LAW’s victories for employees are the following:

2018

  • ESKRIDGE LAW settled a pre-litigation employment claim on behalf of its client (the employee).

2017

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a pre-litigation settlement of $700,000 in a wage and hour claim brought on behalf of a caretaker who was an undocumented immigrant.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW settled a pre-litigation whistleblower case regarding the False Claims Act.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully settled a case regarding discrimination based on taking leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act and the California Family Rights Act for $140,000.

2016

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $106,000 pre-litigation settlement on behalf of a client who was forced to quit his job due to being retaliated against for whistleblowing.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $145,000 settlement on behalf of an employee who was terminated after complaining about age and disability-based discrimination and harassment.

2015

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained reinstatement for a client who had been terminated from a major university.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $46,000 pre-litigation settlement on behalf of a client based on age, sex, and sexual orientation discrimination.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a pre-litigation settlement of $50,000 on behalf of an employee who was retaliated against for whistleblowing.

2014

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a settlement of $159,000 on behalf of an employee who was harassed and discriminated against based on her physical disabilities and on her age.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained $130,000 on behalf of a client who had been forced to quit his job due to violation of wage and hour laws.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a pre-litigation settlement of $136,000 on behalf of an employee who was retaliated against for whistleblowing.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a settlement of $165,000 on behalf of an employee who was harasses and discriminated against based on his age.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $105,000 settlement on behalf of a client in a case involving breach of an employment contract..
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained reinstatement plus $10,000 in lost wages on behalf of a client who had been wrongfully terminated.

2013

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $136,000 pre-litigation settlement on behalf of a medical administrator who was retaliated against for whistleblowing concerning patient care issues.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $240,000 settlement on behalf of a public employee who was discriminated against because of his age and disability.  
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $125,000 pre-litigation settlement on behalf of an accountant who was harassed and discriminated against because of his age and disability.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $90,000 settlement on behalf of a client who “blew the whistle” on safety issues which impacted the general public.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $65,000 pre-litigation settlement on behalf of a company district controller who was terminated after refusing to violate the Labor Code.

2012

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained an early retirement package for a client who became medically unable to perform the essential functions of her job.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained over a settlement of more than $300,000 on behalf of a female welder who was sexually harassed at work.  (This settlement was obtained in only a couple months.)
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a settlement of $90,000 on behalf of an accountant who was terminated after having a heart attack and bypass surgery.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $50,000 pre-litigation settlement on behalf of a customer service representative who was terminated because of her race and physical disability.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a pre-litigation settlement of $50,000 on behalf of a housekeeping employee who was sexually harassed.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a pre-litigation settlement of $57,500 on behalf of a senior maintenance technician who was terminated because of whistleblowing and also because of his physical disability.

2011

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained over $150,000 on behalf of a female executive who was sexually harassed at work.  (This settlement was obtained in less than a month).
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $125,000 settlement on behalf of a teacher who was harassed and discriminated against because of his race and retaliated against for whistleblowing.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $28,000 settlement for an employee who was denied meal breaks.  (This took only a couple weeks to achieve).
  • ESKRIDGE LAW assisted several clients in obtaining their unemployment compensation benefits.

2010

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a pre-litigation settlement of $165,000 for a client who was terminated because of his age.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a settlement of $125,000 in a pregnancy discrimination case.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a pre-litigation settlement of $40,000 for a Filipino client in a race discrimination case.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW was successful in several unemployment appeals before the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a settlement of $77,000 for a salesperson who was sexually harassed and then terminated because of her gender.  (This settlement was obtained in a few months, without filing a lawsuit).
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a settlement of $40,000 for a hospital employee who was harassed and discriminated against because of her age.  (This settlement was obtained in only a couple months, without filing a lawsuit). 
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained settlements totaling $68,000 for a female employee who was sexually harassed at a medical office.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $50,000 settlement for an executive who was terminated when his division was dissolved.  (This settlement was obtained within a few months, without filing a lawsuit).
  • ESKRIDGE LAW was successful in obtaining long term disability insurance coverage for an employee who suffered from rheumatoid arthritis and fibromyalgia.

2009

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $207,000 settlement for an aerospace company employee who was discriminated against and harassed based on her sex.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $100,000 settlement for a corporate vice president who was discriminated against and harassed based on her sex.  (This settlement was obtained within a few months, without filing a lawsuit).
  • ESKRIDGE LAW was successful in getting an employee who had been terminated because of a mental disability reinstated with full back pay, and in obtaining an accommodation for the employee’s disability.  (This settlement was obtained within a few weeks, without filing a lawsuit).
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $55,000 settlement for an employee who was terminated for complaining about wage and hour violations.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $50,000 settlement for a female employee who was sexually harassed by a co-worker.  (This settlement was obtained within a few months, without filing a lawsuit).
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $25,000 settlement for an employee who had been terminated for complaining about sex discrimination.  (This settlement was obtained within a couple months, without filing a lawsuit).

2008

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained settlements totaling $251,0000 for an employee who was terminated from joint employers in retaliation for reporting racial harassment.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $203,000 settlement for an employee who was discriminated against based on his age and race.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $225,000 settlement for an employee who was sexually harassed by her supervisors.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $180,000 settlement for an employee who was terminated in retaliation for reporting racial harassment and other illegal activity which was occurring in the workplace.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $172,500 settlement for an employee who was terminated by a hospital in retaliation for whistleblowing.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $250,000 settlement for an employee who was retaliated against after he reported that a supervisor was harassing other employees based on their race.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $220,000 settlement for an employee who was terminated based on his age.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $125,000 settlement for an employee who was terminated for whistleblowing.

2007

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $120,000 settlement for an employee who was exposed to race-based harassment at work.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $50,000 settlement plus a new job and her own department for a public attorney who had been discriminated against based on her gender.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained reinstatement of a longshoreman who had been improperly terminated.

2006

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $150,000 settlement for a nurse who had been sexually harassed.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $60,000 settlement for a licensed clinical social worker who had been discriminated against based on her age and gender.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $45,000 settlement on behalf of an executive who had been discriminated against based on his age and physical disability.

2005

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $75,000 pre-litigation settlement for a hotel manager who had been discriminated against based on her age and gender.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $150,000 settlement for a health care worker who was terminated while he was out on disability leave, after the employer caused the employee’s mental disability by harassing him based on his age.

2004

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $45,000 settlement for an executive who was fired in violation of his employment contract.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $190,000 settlement for two auto mechanics who had been discriminated and harassed based on their ages and race.

2003

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $100,000 settlement for an employee who was sexually harassed, and who was retaliated against when she reported the harassment to Human Resources.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $120,000 settlement for an employee who was sexually harassed, then fired when she reported the harassment to Human Resources.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $45,000 settlement for an employee who was disabled by grand mal seizures.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $280,000 settlement for an employee who was terminated for complaining about various legal improprieties being committed by his employer.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $75,000 settlement for an employee who was offered a promotion in exchange for sexual favors.

2002

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $175,000 settlement in a gender and race discrimination case.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $135,000 settlement in a breach of contract matter, only a month after filing the lawsuit.

2001

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $115,000 settlement in a gender and race discrimination case.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $750,000 settlement in a race discrimination case.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $150,000 settlement in a disability discrimination case.

2000

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $100,000 settlement for a customer service manager who was discriminated against based on her gender.

1999

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $75,000 settlement for a school counselor who was wrongfully terminated.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $176,500 settlement in a sexual harassment case.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $275,000 Judgment in a pregnancy discrimination case following a trial by jury in Los Angeles Superior Court.

1998

  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $200,000 settlement for its sexual harassment client without even filing a lawsuit.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW obtained a $400,000 settlement in a medical condition discrimination/gender discrimination case five months after filing the action.

Employer:

ESKRIDGE LAW has always been able to prevent its employer clients from being sued at all – provided the firm is retained before the lawsuit is filed.  As a result, ESKRIDGE LAW seldom represents employer clients in litigation.  However, the following are some representative cases in which ESKRIDGE LAW defended employers who had not obtained legal advice from ESKRIDGE LAW prior to being sued:

2018

  • ESKRIDGE LAW represented several employers with high-risk terminations.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW prepared employee manuals and other employment documents for numerous employers.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW settled a disability discrimination lawsuit against its client (the employer) in only a few months.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW settled a wage and hour case against its client (the employer) despite being retained only weeks before trial.

2016

  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully settled a wage and hour class action with over 500 class members for less than $400,000.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW settled a pre-litigation claim of disability discrimination and harassment for $8,500 on behalf of its employer client.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW settled a pre-litigation claim of disability discrimination and harassment, and wage and hour violations, of $7,500 on behalf of its employer client.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW settled a sexual harassment and intentional infliction of emotional distress case for $45,000 on behalf of its employer client.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW settled a sexual harassment case for $18,000 on behalf of its employer client.

2015

  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully settled a sexual harassment case for only $45,000 very early in the litigation.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully settled a five-plaintiff wage and hour case for only $5,900 per plaintiff.

2014

  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully settled a wage and hour case brought against a law firm for only $7,500 very early in the litigation.

2013

  • ESKRIDGE LAW prepared numerous employee manuals, severance agreements, and other employment-related documents for its employer clients.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully prevented many of its employer clients from being sued, despite employees’ allegations of discrimination and harassment.

2012

  • ESKRIDGE LAW advised several of its employer clients in matters including disability leave law, age discrimination law, and sexual harassment law.  ESKRIDGE LAW also advised its employer clients relating to lay-offs and other terminations.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW was successful in negotiating a severance package of under $3,000, preventing its employer client from being sued for pregnancy discrimination.

2011

  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully prevented many of its employer clients from being sued, despite employees’ allegations of discrimination and harassment.

2010

  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully prevented many of its employer clients from being sued by providing well-drafted employee manuals, pre-hire documents, employment contracts, and general employment law advice.

2009

  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully defended a major non-profit corporation which had been accused of terminating an employee based on a physical disability.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully resolved a sexual harassment claim made by a former employee against an aerospace company.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully defended an overtime claim against a fashion design company.

2008

  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully resolved an age discrimination claim made by a former employee against an aerospace company.

2007

  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully resolved a lawsuit in which a former employee alleged pregnancy discrimination.

2005 – 2006

  • ESKRIDGE LAW prevented numerous of its employer clients from having any claims brought against them.

2004

  • ESKRIDGE LAW represented an out-patient surgical clinic and successfully resolved a lawsuit claiming unpaid overtime pay.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully defended two 7-Eleven stores who were sued by the same former employee claiming he was owed wages for unpaid overtime, among other things.

2003

  • ESKRIDGE LAW represented a cabinet maker and successfully resolved a lawsuit claiming unpaid overtime pay.

2001

  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully represented a confetti and balloon company in a case in which the former employee alleged unpaid overtime, termination in violation of public policy (whistleblowing), and defamation.  The employee dismissed her lawsuit while the motion for summary judgment ESKRIDGE LAW had filed was pending.
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully defended an adult day school in a wrongful termination case.  (In fact, ESKRIDGE LAW got the case dismissed within a couple months of being retained – with no settlement being paid.)
  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully defended a tile and marble store in a lawsuit claiming discrimination, retaliation, and wrongful termination.

2000

  • ESKRIDGE LAW represented a computer company in a wrongful termination case which alleged termination in violation of the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA).

1999

  • ESKRIDGE LAW successfully defended a company in the aircraft industry in a case in which the former employee claimed she was fired in retaliation for whistleblowing.

Community Partnerships and Contributions:

ESKRIDGE LAW believes in giving back to the communities it serves.  To that end, the firm has contributed to and is involved in grassroots partnerships with various non-profit community-based organizations.  Some of the community-based organizations to which ESKRIDGE LAW has contributed either time, money, or both, include:

  • Hercules Animal Rescue, Inc. – financial assistance and pro bono legal services;
  • Emergency Animal Rescue, Inc. – financial assistance and pro bono legal services;
  • Friends of Cats, Inc. – financial assistance and pro bono legal services;
  • Torrance Human Relations Forum – “Visions of Unity” art and writing scholarships for Torrance Unified School District students – financial assistance;
  • Cancer Legal Resource Center – pro bono legal services;
  • Victims of AIDS – pro bono legal services;
  • National Down Syndrome Society – financial assistance.

Commissions, Memberships & Certifications:

  • State Bar of California;
  • Los Angeles County Bar Association;
  • Professional Responsibility and Ethics Committee of the Los Angeles County Bar Association;
  • California Bureau of Real Estate;
  • National Employment Lawyers Association;
  • American Association for Justice;
  • Consumer Attorneys Associations for Southern California;
  • American Bar Association
  • Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles;
  • South Bay Bar Association.

On Duty Meal Breaks

In #California, #employers must provide #employees with a #30minute uninterrupted off-duty #mealbreak when the employee works over five hours. #EskridgeLaw

Some #jobs may qualify for #onduty #mealbreaks, when the nature of the #work prevents the #employee from being relieved of all duties, and when there is an #agreement in #writing. #EskridgeLaw

In a #written #agreement for #onduty #mealbreaks, it must state that the #employee may revoke the agreement, in another writing. #EskridgeLaw

A recent #California #lawsuit involving #LchaimHouse provided #employers with guidance regarding how long an #onduty #mealbreak must be. #EskridgeLaw

LchaimHouse operates a #247 #residentialcare #home for #seniors. The #employees take #onduty #mealbreaks to continue caring for the #residents. #EskridgeLaw

The #DLSE, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, discovered that #Lchaims #employees were not taking a #30minute #onduty #mealbreak. #EskridgeLaw

Due to this #violation, the #DLSE cited #Lchaim for #wageandhour violations, and fined them $89,000. #EskridgeLaw

The #CourtofAppeal held that #mealbreaks must be at least #30minutes, regardless of #onduty or #offduty. #EskridgeLaw

The big take-away? Employers: Make sure you’re providing #employees with a #30minute #mealbreak to avoid major #wageandhour #penalties! #EskridgeLaw

Alex and Ani

Alex and Ani is a woman-run charm bracelet company based in Rhode Island. The founder, Carolyn Rafaelian, has brought a lawsuit against Bank of America, one of its lenders, alleging a violation of federal law for discriminating against a woman-led company. Alex and Ani filed its lawsuit in New York, seeking$1.1 billion in damages for claims based on gender bias. Alex and Ani claims that Bank of America falsely declared it defaulted on its loan in 2018, and stopped its line of credit. Alex and Ani claims this was to force it to return to the days that men were in charge of the company. Follow us for updates as the lawsuit unfolds.

Donohue v. AMN Servs.

In a recent California case, Donohue v. AMN Servs., the plaintiff sued her employer, a staffing company, for unpaid wages. AMN Servs. used a computer-based timekeeping system, which would round the employee’s punch-in and punch-out time to the nearest ten-minute increment. The California Court of Appeal held that, under California law, an employer could round an employees wages so long as it was “fair and neutral on its face.” To be considered fair, the rounding policy would have to “favor neither overpayment nor underpayment” of the employee. For more information, call Eskridge Law today or visit us online at http://www.eskridgelaw.net.

Image result for scale of money purple

Me Too

The #MeTooMovement was founded in 2006 to help #survivors of #sexualviolence. This movement has led to vast changes in #California law, which we have been reporting on. #EskridgeLaw

The point of the #metoomovement is to expand #global #conversation about #sexualviolence and #sexualharassment. #California #EskridgeLaw

The #metoomovement is open to people of all #communities, including #young people, #queer, #trans, #poc, #bpoc, #disabled, #men and #women. #California #EskridgeLaw

Girls for #Gender #Equality, or #GGE, is the #fiscal #sponsor of the #metoomovement, working with #charitable contributions to implement the program. #California #EskridgeLaw

The #metoomovement offers #resources including #healingresources, #advocacy, #toolkits, and #nationalresources. #California #EskridgeLaw #Metoo

The #metoomovement has resources for people of any #age, #issue, #gender, #ethnicity, or #disability; #Members of the #lgbtqia+ #community and people with #military status can also count on support. #EskridgeLaw

Do you have questions about #sexualharassment? Want to learn more about your #rights? Contact us at http://www.eskridgelaw.com for more information. #California #LosAngeles #EskridgeLaw #SexualHarassmentLawyer

New California case #Townleyv.BJsRestaurants, holds employers are not required to reimburse employees for the cost of slip- resistant shoes as “#necessaryexpenditures” under #LaborCode2802.

A recent California case, Townley v. BJ’s Restaurants, decided the issue of whether employers are required to reimburse employees for the cost of slip-resistant shoes as “necessary expenditures” under Labor Code section 2802. Townley, a server at BJ’s, sued her employer on behalf of herself and other aggrieved employees because it had a safety policy which required all hourly employees to wear black, slip-resistant, close-toed shoes, but did not reimburse employees for the purchase of the shoes. In deciding this issue, the Court of Appeal was persuaded by an almost identical (but unpublished) case Lemus v. Denny’s Inc. (9th Cir. 2015) 617 Fed.Appx. 701. In Lemus, the Ninth Circuit held that Labor Code section 2802 (which requires an employer to reimburse employees “for all necessary expenditures or losses incurred by the employee in direct consequence of the discharge of his or her duties . . .”) did not require Denny’s to reimburse the cost of its employees’ slip-resistant footwear. The plaintiff did not present any authority that applied Labor Code section 2802 in a way that required the employer to pay for non-uniform work clothing. California law requires employers to pay for employees’ work clothing when it is considered a “uniform” or “qualified as certain protective apparel regulated by Cal/OSHA.” [Id. at 703.] Further, the Lemus court explained that the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement “DLSE” has clarified that employers are not required to furnish basic wardrobe items that are “usable and generally usable in the occupation, such as white shirts, dark pants and black shoes and belts, all of unspecified designed . . .” [Id.] Here, like Lemus, Plaintiff could not establish that the slip-resistant shoes were part of BJ’s uniform or were not “generally useable in the restaurant occupation.” BJ’s policy did not require its employees to purchase a specific brand, style, or design of slip-resistant shoes, nor did it prohibit its employees from wearing their shoes outside of work. As such, the cost of the shoes did not qualify as a “necessary expenditure” within the meaning of Labor Code section 2802.

Ward v. Tilly’s, Inc.

In a recent California case, Ward v. Tilly’s, Inc., the plaintiff filed a wage and hour class action against her former employer, Tilly’s, for violating wage order No. 7. The complaint stated that Tilly’s scheduled its employees for regular and on-call shifts. For the shifts that were on-call, employees had to call in two hours prior to the start of the shift to find out if they were needed at work. Plaintiff argued that she should receive wages for her reporting time, even if she did not physically come into work. The California Court of Appeal held that if an employer directs his or her employees to present themselves for work, even by calling in prior to a shift to see if work is available, the reporting time pay is triggered. The court held that ‘report for work’ means that the employer chose a method for the employee to present themselves to work – including a telephone call. For more information, call Eskridge Law today or visit us online at http://www.eskridgelaw.net.

Lawsuit Against Payroll Service

=

In a recent California case, Goonewardene v. ADP, LLC, the plaintiff brought a lawsuit against ADP, a payroll service provider, for wrongful termination, violations of state and federal labor laws, breach of contract, false advertisement, negligence, and negligent misrepresentation. Plaintiff’s former employer had contracted with ADP to provide wage processing services, and under this contract, plaintiff argued that ADP became their employer. While the California Court of Appeal held that the plaintiff could proceed with their claims against ADP based on negligent performance for payroll services, the California Supreme Court reversed, finding that plaintiff could not be a third party beneficiary for ADP’s employment contract. For more information, call Eskridge Law today or visit us online at http://www.eskridgelaw.net.

Social Media Blurbs Regarding Senate Bill 224

SenateBill224 expands the individuals who may be responsible for #harassment in an #employment #relationship, including #investors, #directors, #producers, #electedofficials, and #lobbyists. #EskridgeLaw

Under #existing #law #liability for #sexualharassment arises when the #victim can prove a #professional or #business #relationship with the #accused, and there is an #inability for the victim to #easily #terminate that relationship. #EskridgeLaw

Under #SenateBill224, the #victim no longer must prove that he/she could not have #easily #terminated the #relationship. #California #EskridgeLaw

SenateBill224 holds the #Department of #FairEmploymentandHousing, or #FEHA, #responsible for #enforcing #sexualharassment #claims. #California #Harassment #EskridgeLaw

SenateBill224 makes it #unlawful to #deny #rights of a #person related to #sexualharassment #actions. #California #Harassment #EskridgeLaw

Social Media Blurbs Regarding Senate Bill 1343

SenateBill1343 expands the requirements for #sexualharassment training, beginning #January2019. #California #TheMoreYouKnow #NewLaw #EskridgeLaw

Current #Californialaw requires #employers with #50 or more #employees to provide three hours of #sexualharassment #training to #supervisors. #SenateBill1343 expands this to include employers with at least 5 employees. #EskridgeLaw

Beginning #January2020, #SenateBill1343 requires at least one hour of #training on #sexualharassment to non-supervisor #employees as well.

What about #seasonal #employees? #SenateBill1343 requires #temporary employees that are hired for less than six months to undergo the training within 30 days of their hire date or 100 hours of #work, whichever comes first. #EskridgeLaw

When it comes to #hiring a #temp, the #tempagency is on the hook for #training, not the #employer. #EskridgeLaw

So, what kind of #training is it? #SenateBill1343 offers the #interactive training #courses on the #DFEH #website. However, an #employee may opt for #live training. #EskridgeLaw

In the meanwhile, the #DFEH has a #toolkit for #sexualharassment #prevention, including a #training #presentation. #EskridgLaw

Who can #provide #sexualharassment #prevention #training under #SenateBill1343? #Attorneys practicing #employmentlaw for over 2 years, #humanresources, #professionals, or #lawschool instructors with #California degrees and #employmentlaw instruction. #EskridgeLaw

Social Media Blurbs Regarding Senate Bill 1300

On #January1st, #California responded to the #metoomovement by enacting new #senatebills that #protect and #help #survivors of #sexualharassment. #MeToo #WeBelieveYou #EskridgeLaw

Under #SenateBill1300, there is more #liability under the #FairEmploymentandHousingAct, by lowering the #burdenofproof for #harassment. #FEHA #California #EskridgeLaw

SenateBill1300 makes #employers in #California liable for #sexualharassment claims and any #unlawful #harassment by non-employees if the employer knew or should have known of the harassment and failed to take #appropriate #action. #EskridgeLaw

SenateBill1300 #prohibits #employers from requiring an #employee to release a #FEHA claim for a #raise or #bonus, or by #threatening their #employment. #California #EskridgeLaw

SenateBill1300 in #California provides #guidance on #bystander #intervention #training. #Prevent #Harassment #SexualHarassment #EskridgeLaw

SenateBill1300 in #California #prohibits a prevailing #defendant from being #awarded #fees and #costs, for the most part. #Harassment #SexualHarassment #EskridgeLaw

SenateBill1300 in #California lowers the #burdenofproof from #tangible #productivity #declined as a result of the harassment to #reasonableperson would find the harassment altered their #working #conditions. #Harassment #SexualHarassment #EskridgeLaw

SenateBill1300 in #California changes the standard, and finds that even a #single #incident of #harassment may establish a #hostile #workenvironment. #SexualHarassment #EskridgeLaw

Think you don’t have protection under #SenateBill1300 because you’re an #independentcontractor? Think again. #California’s definition of an IC makes it likely that an IC may be #reclassified as an #employee for purposes of this bill. #EskridgeLaw

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started