<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Storm&#039;s Employment Law &#187; Misc</title>
	<atom:link href="http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/tag/misc/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com</link>
	<description>The First Blog Dedicated To California Employment Law. Since 2004.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 06 May 2012 15:29:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>New Kosher Certification Implicates Employment Conditions</title>
		<link>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/new-kosher-certification-implicates-employment-conditions/</link>
		<comments>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/new-kosher-certification-implicates-employment-conditions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 03:12:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jon-Erik Storm</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Categories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Misc]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/?p=439</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism and the Rabbinical Assembly have released a policy statement today about its new &#8220;Hekhsher Tzedek&#8221; (&#8220;Justice Certification&#8221;) guidelines for kosher foods.  Hekhsher Tzedek goes above and beyond the traditional ritual slaughter and cleanliness provisions. &#8230; <a href="http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/new-kosher-certification-implicates-employment-conditions/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/new-kosher-certification-implicates-employment-conditions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Does The Unruh Act Enact HTML 4.01 Standards For e-Commerce?</title>
		<link>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/does-the-unruh-act-enact-html-401-standards-for-e-commerce/</link>
		<comments>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/does-the-unruh-act-enact-html-401-standards-for-e-commerce/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Oct 2007 17:14:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jon-Erik Storm</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Categories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ADA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Americans with Disabilities Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Misc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Title III]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unruh]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/?p=316</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Plaintiff in National Federation of the Blind v. Target Corp. says so. In its Complaint, at Paragraph 30, it states as follows: Alternative text (“Alt-text”) is invisible code embedded beneath a graphical image on a website. Web accessibility requires &#8230; <a href="http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/does-the-unruh-act-enact-html-401-standards-for-e-commerce/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/does-the-unruh-act-enact-html-401-standards-for-e-commerce/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>More on Gentry</title>
		<link>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/more-on-gentry/</link>
		<comments>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/more-on-gentry/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Sep 2007 16:15:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jon-Erik Storm</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Categories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gentry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Misc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wage/hour]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/?p=300</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bruce Nye at Cal Biz Lit has an interesting post on Gentry (h/t The UCL Practitioner.) In my original post on Gentry, I noted that: I think the practical effect of this case will far exceed its holding. In fact, &#8230; <a href="http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/more-on-gentry/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/more-on-gentry/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Circuit City files for reconsideration. [Live from Sacramento!]</title>
		<link>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/circuit-city-files-for-reconsideration-live-from-sacramento/</link>
		<comments>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/circuit-city-files-for-reconsideration-live-from-sacramento/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2007 04:25:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jon-Erik Storm</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Categories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gentry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Misc]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/?p=294</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[09/17/2007 Rehearing petition filed Circuit City Stores, Inc., real party in interest by Steven B. Katz, Thelen Reid Brown Raysman &#38; Steiner, LLP CRC 8.25(b]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/circuit-city-files-for-reconsideration-live-from-sacramento/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Editorial: The Arbitration Fairness Act</title>
		<link>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/editorial-the-arbitration-fairness-act/</link>
		<comments>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/editorial-the-arbitration-fairness-act/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2007 16:14:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jon-Erik Storm</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Misc]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/?p=257</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The proposed Arbitration Fairness Act (Feingold/Johnson) would essentially ban arbitration agreements in employment. While I&#8217;m skeptical of this bill&#8217;s chances of success in getting a vote in the Senate, or in being signed by the President, and I believe this &#8230; <a href="http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/editorial-the-arbitration-fairness-act/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/editorial-the-arbitration-fairness-act/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Employee Free Choice Act</title>
		<link>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/employee-free-choice-act/</link>
		<comments>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/employee-free-choice-act/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2007 16:19:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jon-Erik Storm</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Misc]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/?p=247</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I don&#8217;t have much to say on the EFCA except for that I seem to be seeing an awful lot of news and commentary about it.&#160; I&#8217;m sure the attorneys who write these are smart enough to understand that, even &#8230; <a href="http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/employee-free-choice-act/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/employee-free-choice-act/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Murphy</title>
		<link>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/murphy/</link>
		<comments>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/murphy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jan 2007 21:39:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jon-Erik Storm</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Misc]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/?p=244</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Are emotional distress injuries taxable? No, says the D.C. Circuit, at least for now. Murphy v. IRS, 460 F.3d 79 (D.C.Cir. 2006). While this is clearly beyond the normal scope of this page, the question of taxation is always the &#8230; <a href="http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/murphy/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/murphy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Summary Judgment</title>
		<link>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/summary-judgment/</link>
		<comments>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/summary-judgment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jan 2007 21:30:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jon-Erik Storm</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Misc]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/?p=241</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Are we about to undergo a wave of increasing summary judgment denials? I&#8217;m not sure that that necessarily follows from the &#62;230:1 ratio between CEO pay and average employee pay, or the wave of minimum wage hikes. But I listen &#8230; <a href="http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/summary-judgment/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/summary-judgment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Delfino v. Agilent Technologies, Inc.</title>
		<link>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/delfino-v-agilent-technologies-inc/</link>
		<comments>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/delfino-v-agilent-technologies-inc/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Dec 2006 20:56:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jon-Erik Storm</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Misc]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/?p=238</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yesterday, the Sixth District filed an opinion that found an employer immune from state law tort claims under the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA). The plaintiffs alleged that an Agilent employee had used Agilent’s computers to send threatening email &#8230; <a href="http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/delfino-v-agilent-technologies-inc/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/delfino-v-agilent-technologies-inc/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hernandez v. Hillside, Inc.</title>
		<link>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/hernandez-v-hillside-inc/</link>
		<comments>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/hernandez-v-hillside-inc/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Sep 2006 23:49:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jon-Erik Storm</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Categories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hillside]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Misc]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/?p=233</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hat tip to Sheppard Mullin. You can read their more detailed analysis. I would just add that the technical holding in the Saunders case cited by the Hernandez court is not As a matter of law, a claim of intrusion &#8230; <a href="http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/hernandez-v-hillside-inc/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/hernandez-v-hillside-inc/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

