October 16, 2013
Speaking of vacated submissions and supplemental briefing, the Supreme Court will tomorrow file its opinion in a much-watched arbitration case — Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno. The court will there decide: (1) Can a mandatory employment arbitration agreement be enforced prior to the conclusion of an administrative proceeding conducted by the Labor Commissioner concerning an employee’s statutory wage claim? (2) Was the Labor Commissioner’s jurisdiction over the employee’s statutory wage claim divested by the Federal Arbitration Act under Preston v. Ferrer (2008) __ U.S. __, 128 S.Ct. 978, 169 L.Ed.2d 917? Two and a half months after the April oral argument, the court vacated submission and asked the parties to brief the significance, if any, of the United States Supreme Court’s June 20 decision in American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant.
The court will also issue a decision in Sterling Park, L.P. v. City of Palo Alto. That case, argued in September, raises the issue which statute of limitations applies to plaintiff’s action challenging the city’s imposition of conditions on a development project pursuant to a local ordinance, the 90-day statute of limitations for challenging an agency decision under the Subdivision Map Act (Gov. Code. § 66499.37) or the 180-day statute of limitations for challenging the imposition of “any fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions imposed on a development project” (Gov. Code, § 66020).
The opinions can be viewed online tomorrow beginning at 10:00 a.m.