Photo of Sheryl L. Skibbe

Sheryl (“Sherry”) Skibbe is a Shareholder at Vedder Price and a member of the Labor & Employment group in the firm’s Los Angeles office.

Ms. Skibbe is an experienced litigator with a strong record of success representing global clients in the defense of complex class, collective, and representative actions and high-risk lawsuits.

The three-judge panel that decided AB 51 was (mostly) lawful, and that employers could not retaliate against employees who refused to sign arbitration agreements as a condition of employment, withdrew the decision and agreed to take another look.  On August 22, 2022, two of three members of the panel that decided Chamber of Commerce of the U.S. v. Bonta voted to withdraw the ruling sua sponte and agreed to a rehearing in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana.

Continue Reading Prohibiting Mandatory Arbitration:  Ninth Circuit Agrees to a Re-Do

Widening the split among circuit courts, the Third Circuit recently rejected attempts by two out-of-state employees to join an FLSA collective action as opt-in plaintiffs because their claims did not “arise out of or relate to” the defendant’s contacts with the state in which the case is pending.  

Continue Reading The Third Circuit Decides “We’re (Not) Nationwide”

Employment practitioners will be waiting with bated breath now that the California Supreme Court has granted the defendant’s petition for review in Uber Technologies, Inc. v. Adolph, S274671.  This is the second PAGA case California’s top court will review since the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana, which held that the Federal Arbitration Act requires courts to enforce parties’ arbitration agreements and preempts conflicting state laws that invalidate contractual waivers of the right to assert representative claims under PAGA.  See our prior coverage of Viking River Cruises here.

Continue Reading California Supreme Court to Address Viking River Cruises

Is the right to compel arbitration waived only when the plaintiff can show prejudice from the defendant’s inconsistent actions and delay?  In Morgan v. Sundance, Inc., No. 21-328 (2022), the Supreme Court found that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) does not permit courts to create tests to favor arbitration over litigation, and that a showing of prejudice is not required for a claim of waiver.

Continue Reading U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Prejudice Element for a Claim of Waiver