Mazarei LAW GROUP

Orange County Employment Attorney Offers Opinion About The Latest Amendment A very important amendment that has gone into effect as of January 1, 2019, is the change to the language of California Civil Code Section 1542. The changes to the language of the Code resulted from California Senate Bill No. 1431. More specifically, Section 3 of the Bill adds releasing party and released party alongside creditor and debtor. Section 3 of the Bill also changes must have materi...ally affected to would have materially affected regarding the creditor’s or releasing party’s decision to settle. The changes in the language of Section 1542 have important effects on all aspects of civil litigation, including employment law. So, employers who settle cases in 2019, must heed the changes. California employers must make sure to include the new language of Section 1542 in all the severance agreements and settlement agreement and releases executed in 2019. So, what are the changes? The 2019 severance and releases must contain the below language: A general release does not extend to claims that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release and that, if known by him or her, would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or released party. At first glance, it is difficult to decipher the changes as a new language is very close to the old language of Section 1542. To clarify the changes, the language below clearly shows the modification made to Section 1542: A general release does not extend to claims which that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release, which and that if known by him or her, must would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or released party. To make sure that all releases are enforceable, the new language needs to be implemented by all employment law lawyer immediately. Contact Orange County Employment Attorney, Tawny Mazarei for further information or assistance. Mazarei Law Group, Inc. 18881 Von Karman Ave. Suite 1620 Irvine, CA 92612 Phone: (714) 418-5797 [email protected] https://mazareilaw.com/

According to the Orange County Disability Insurance Attorney, Tawny Mazarei, California State Disability Insurance (CASDI or SDI) is a statutory (state-audited and state-regulated) state disability program of California, and it is mainly for short-term disability income replacement. CASDI has been in effect since 1946. The contributions to the State Fund usually by SDI tax paid by employees and some of the employees are what added up to be the costs of the program. The contri...butions by the employees are deducted from the state fund as state taxes. Once a doctor certifies that it is not possible for you to do your job, then you are disabled, according to California’s Employment Development Department (EDD). Some of what counts as disability include pregnancy (four weeks before and after childbirth and six weeks after for a C-section) and elective and cosmetic surgeries. If you are an employer with about five or more employees working for you, you are entitled to provide reasonable accommodations for your employees that have disabilities. This becomes compulsory for you once you know that any of your employees have a disability; either you are told directly by the employee or one of your employees, or you observe the disability from any of your employees. Now that you know, you need to engage in an informal discussion or you enter the interactive process stage with the employee to understand the type of accommodation he/she needs. This accommodation must allow the employee to perform the tasks he was hired for in your company. Also, the employer must ask for medical documentation from the employee for full details about the disability. Once the employer knows all these, he/she must take the privacy of the employee serious by not leaking out his/her secrets. Whether the employer can provide a reasonable accommodation or not, it is likely to create an unwarranted hardship on the employer, and it requires an individualized analysis. This analysis is dependent on factors like the disability of the employer, the cost of the accommodation, and the ability of the employer to pay for it. The only way you can do this perfectly is with the help of an Orange County Disability Insurance Attorney. (714) 418-5797 [email protected] https://mazareilaw.com/blog/

By Steven Crighton Daily Journal Staff Writer SO PROUD OF OUR COLLEAGUES AND THEIR STAND:... With a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel poised to rule on a temporary restraining order limiting President Donald J. Trump's executive order on immigration, nearly 300 colleges, 100 technology companies, 16 state attorneys general and a host of civil rights organizations voiced their opposition to the ban in amicus briefs filed over the weekend. The legal argument behind each filing varies, with some focusing on the potential economic impacts, some focusing on the order's alleged legal failings, while others raise concerns over human rights violations. About 200 companies on the Fortune 500 were founded by immigrants or their children, the brief notes, and collectively they generate trillions annually and employ millions. While the order allows for "case-by-case exceptions," the lack of criteria for exceptions has caused concerns over favoritism, according to Andrew J. Pincus, a Mayer Brown LLP partner who wrote the tech companies' brief. The professors' brief, signed by 292 universities nationwide, claims the ban would severely impact students from the seven affected countries, who would be prohibited from traveling outside the U.S. for academic or personal reasons out of "fear that they may fall out of legal status and suffer deportation." "Furthermore, if international students from the seven banned countries are no longer able to attend school in the U.S., either because they are denied entry to the country or their visas expire, our universities stand to lose hundreds of millions of dollars," the professors' wrote in their brief. Fatma Marouf, a Texas A&M School of Law professor who wrote the brief, said the pending 9th Circuit review required the brief to be turned around within 24 hours. "Most of the briefs I've submitted have been on the merits, while this is on the temporary restraining order. The parties only had one day, so it's been a little crazy," Marouf said. Katskee said he's "certainly never encountered anything like this before" in regards to how rapid the response has been from so many disparate entities. "Anytime you seek a temporary restraining order, you have to act quickly, but amicus briefs are incredibly rare in those proceedings and almost never happen largely because of the time constraints," Katskee said. "But this is different, there are millions of lives being affected."

http://www.habitat.org/gv/trip/GV14500.

IS THIS FOR REAL: A Michigan man has learned a hard lesson about the importance of following a court order. Warned by Kent County Circuit Court Judge James Robert Redford not to put his baseball cap back on until he had exited the courtroom, Ryan Cameron Lasenby, 29, donned it again a few steps short of the entrance. The result was a contempt citation and a choice: Ryan Cameron Lasenby must either pay a $100 fine or serve 10 days in jail, reports MLive.com. An incredulous La...senby apologized, but too late. "Ten days in jail for wearing a hat? he said. http://www.abajournal.com//man_faces_100_fine_or_10_days/ See more

A MUST READ FOR ALL: The Supreme Court will return next week to one of the most controversial topics in constitutional law: the separation of church and state. The court is scheduled to hear oral arguments Nov. 6 in Town of Greece v. Galloway, which poses the issue of whether explicitly Christian prayers before town board meetings, delivered by invited Christian clergy, violate the establishment clause of the First Amendment. Underlying the case is the even larger issue of ...Continue reading

I LOVE THIS STORY - Former death-row inmate Anthony Graves is trying to spend $1.45 million wisely, for the most part. Before his exoneration, Graves spent 18 years behind bars for the 1992 slayings of a mother, her daughter, and her four grandchildren. The Texas Legislature awarded Graves $1.45 million for wrongful incarceration, and he has been mostly careful with the money, Texas Monthly reports in a story noted by the Huffington Post. He did buy himself a BMW convertible,... but he also helped his mother rebuild her house and started a foundation to help children whose parents are in prison. Now he has decided on a new use for some of the moneyhonoring the lawyer and journalism professor who fought to free him for eight years. Graves told Texas Monthly he wanted to repay Nicole Cásarez, but he knew she would never accept his money. He opted instead to create a scholarship in her honor at her alma mater, the University of Texas Law School. The gift was revealed at a party. Graves handed Cásarez a framed certificate indicating the school had established the scholarship with Graves’ gift to honor his defender, friend, sister, and angel, to recognize her and her students’ work to exonerate him from a wrongful conviction, and to encourage others to follow her example of hope, perseverance, courage, and humility. Graves was set to be retried for capital murder, but prosecutors dismissed the charges in October 2010 after a special prosecutor who reinvestigated the case, Kelly Siegler, found no evidence linking Graves to the slayings. A co-defendant had originally testified that Graves was an accomplice, but he later recanted. Siegler called the original prosecution a horrible miscarriage of justice. http://www.abajournal.com//freed_after_18_years_ex-inmate_