This note seeks to explore whether California intended to create a right or right of action for a plaintiff seeking to sue an employer for an AB 1844 violation, and if so, what remedies are available to the plaintiff. This note discusses several remedies that may be available: options include, but are not limited to, a discussion of the remedial scheme created by the Private Attorney General Act of 2004; a wrongful discharge claim in violation of public policy; or a civil penalty. Next, this note discusses whether or not the trifocal approach of the rights--right of action--remedy equation is the best test a court should use and advocates for an alternative analysis under Professor Zeigler's singular approach. Lastly, this note suggests a solution for the California courts to adopt in deciding a case arising under AB 1844.
A Right Without a Remedy Is No Right at All: a Case for Why AB 1844 Requires a Remedial Scheme and What It Might Be,
10 Hastings Bus. L.J. 225
Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_business_law_journal/vol10/iss1/6