Source: https://solomonlawguild.com/curt-surls%2C-esq
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 13:00:13+00:00

Document:
Curt Surls is practicing law in the areas of Employment Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, and Wrongful Termination.
Trained as a mediator, Mr. Surls uses his negotiation skills to resolve his clients' conflicts without the need for court intervention. However, he will not hesitate to take a matter to court to achieve the positive results his clients expect and deserve. He has handled hundreds of cases before state and federal courts. In all cases, Mr. Surls fights hard to protect the rights and liberties of his clients, and his law firm has earned a reputation as one of the region's top employment law practices.
Curt Surls is a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation, a non-profit professional association honoring lawyers whose careers have demonstrated dedication to the welfare of the community and the traditions of the profession. Mr. Surls was also named as a “Southern California Super Lawyer” in Los Angeles Magazine for multiple years since 2007, and was listed among the “Best Lawyers in Southern California” by American Law Media/US News and World Report for multiple years, most recently in the 2018 Edition (Tier One).
Mr. Surls was inducted into the prestigious College of Labor and Employment Lawyers (see https://www.laborandemploymentcollege.org), after a vigorous nomination and peer review process (see https://www.laborandemploymentcollege.org/leadership/fellows). The College is a non-profit professional association honoring the leading lawyers nationwide in the practice of Labor and Employment Law, with an emphasis on high standards of professionalism and civility.
Mr. Surls is a member of the National Employment Lawyers Association and the California Employment Lawyers Association, both organizations that emphasize the practice of employment law on behalf of plaintiffs. He is also a member of the Association of Workplace Investigators.
He is a regular speaker on employment law panels for, among other organizations, California Employment Lawyers Association, National Employment Lawyers Association, Los Angeles County Bar Association, Continuing Education of the Bar, Beverly Hills Bar Association, Orange County Bar Association, Consumer Attorneys of Los Angeles and the South Bay Bar Association. He has also written many articles on employment law.
Mr. Surls received his B.A. from the University of Iowa and his J.D. from Loyola Law School (Los Angeles) in 1988. He was admitted to the California Bar in 1988.
Mr. Surls is on the Executive Committee of the Los Angeles County Bar Association Labor and Employment Section and served as Section Chair in 2015-2016. Mr. Surls was Chair of the Section’s 2012 Labor and Employment Law Symposium. He also served on the Fair Judicial Election Practices Committee and the Judicial Election Evaluation Committee. Mr. Surls served as Vice President of the Board of Directors of the Disability Rights Legal Center (www.disabilityrightslegalcenter.org) from 2008 to 2010.
Prior to opening the Law Office of Curt Surls in July 2012, he was a partner with Bornn & Surls for over 15 years. Mr. Surls was also an attorney with the Oakland, California civil rights firm then known as Saperstein, Seligman & Mayeda, specializing in employment and civil rights class actions. Mr. Surls also worked for the State of California as counsel to the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations.
In this roundtable discussion, Phillip Maltin, an expert in employment law and a partner at Los Angeles-based Raines Feldman, LLP; Phyllis Cheng, a Los Angeles mediator, former partner at DLA Piper, and former director of the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing; Curt Surls, a plaintiff’s lawyer and workplace investigator in Manhattan Beach, CA; and Bradley Rutt, vice president of Elkins Jones Insurance Agency, and an attorney licensed in the State of California, shared their advice their insight for employers to consider when addressing this timely issue. Editor-in-Chief Adam Schlagman serves as the Moderator.
Curt was very kind and honest with me about my case, I was referred to him by another attorney. I think he is definitely one of the most sympathetic and strongest lawyers out there.
I endorse this lawyer. While it is hard for me to choose favorites among the hundreds of labor and employment attorneys I have come to know in the last 20 years, I say without reservation that Curt is in the top 99.5% . . .he is off-the-charts smart, well-liked, and highly respected by his legal peers and adversaries. Curt makes a formidable expert witness in workplace investigations and employment cases. He does great volunteer work in the legal community. I would recommend Curt and his law partner Nancy Bornn in a heartbeat.
Mr. Curtis Surls was inducted into the prestigious College of Labor and Employment Lawyers (see https://www.laborandemploymentcollege.org), after a vigorous nomination and peer review process (see https://www.laborandemploymentcollege.org/leadership/fellows). The College is a non-profit professional association honoring the leading lawyers nationwide in the practice of Labor and Employment Law, with an emphasis on high standards of professionalism and civility.
Mr. Surls published several articles on CELA VOICE (http://celavoice.org/), a project of the California Employment Lawyers Association (CELA) dedicated to promoting the voices of workers’ rights attorneys on issues that are important to California workers and the attorneys who represent them.
In continuing fall out from the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, the Ninth Circuit has followed suit in O’Connor and upheld the arbitration clause between Uber and Uber drivers. The lawsuit arose from claims by certain Uber drivers that Uber failed to remit the entire tips from customers to drivers as required by California law and for misclassifying Uber drivers as independent contractors.
Thus, the district court limited the effect of Uber’s arbitration agreement and placed limitation on Uber’s ability to communicate with the new or prospective drivers.
The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s denial of Uber’s motion to compel arbitration in Mohamed v. Uber Technologies, Inc., which covered the same arbitration agreement at issue in O’Connor. Thus, the O’Connor plaintiffs sought to avoid arbitration by raising new arguments as to why the arbitration agreement was unconscionable. First, O’Connor plaintiffs argued that the lead plaintiffs “constructively opted out of the arbitration on behalf of the entire class.” Ninth Circuit noted that such argument only had a Georgia Supreme Court case as support and that case turned on matter of state law. Noting that there was no federal case law that supports the position that the lead plaintiffs could take such an action behalf of the entire class, the Ninth Circuit rejected this argument.
O’Connor plaintiffs’ second argument in favor of unconscionability was a similar refrain of the argument made by the class plaintiffs in Epic Systems, that class action waivers violate the National Labor Relations Act. As Epic Systems settled that issue, Ninth Circuit rejected this argument as well. Thus, the district court’s denial of the motion to compel arbitration was reversed and class certification was reversed as well.
The case is O’Connor v. Uber Technologies, Inc., Case 14-16078.
*** Curt Surls is an attorney in the areas of Employment Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, and Wrongful Termination. Located in Manhattan Beach, California, the Law Office of Curt Surls offers a complete range of employment law services to those living throughout Southern California, including all of Los Angeles, Riverside, Orange and San Bernardino counties. With nearly 30 years of experience focusing almost exclusively on this area of law, attorney Curt Surls and his law firm provide the personalized assistance and effective support his clients need.
California Governor Jerry Brown recent signed four bills that toughens the protection against sexual harassment in the workplace. The bills were part of a legislative package that received strong support from the entertainment industry, which had to deal with numerous cases of highly publicized cases of sexual misconduct in recent years.
Senate Bill 820 deals with confidentiality provisions in settlements relating to sexual misconduct. Specifically, settlement agreements “that prevents the disclosure of factual information related to a claim filed in a civil action or a complaint filed in an administrative action . . . is prohibited”, if such agreement is regarding sexual assault, sexual harassment, workplace sexual harassment or discrimination, or sexual harassment or discrimination by owner of housing accommodation. The bill also prohibits courts from entering any order that prohibits the disclosure of such information. Interestingly, the bill does contain an exception that allows the claimant to request the inclusion of a confidentiality provision to keep such information private. While the purpose of such exception is understandable, it remains to be seen as to whether the exception could eventually swallow the whole, especially if most defendants or accused will simply require the claimant to request such a confidentiality provision as a condition of settlement.
Senate Bill 826 requires California public companies to have at least 1 female board of director by end of 2019. Then, by 2021, any public company with 5 board of directors must have at least 2 female directors and any public company with 6 or more board of directors must have at least 3 female directors. The presence of female decision makers on the board have been advocated by sexual harassment experts as a way of meaningfully impacting the corporate response to sexual harassment and discrimination problems.
Senate Bill 1300 and 1343 seek to broaden the scope of protection by sexual harassment laws. Specifically, Senate Bill 1300 strengthens employer liability where sexual misconduct is committed by independent contractors and non-employees in the course of business. This was viewed as a very important measure by the entertainment industry. Senate Bill 1343 strengthens employer requirements pertaining to sexual harassment training.
California’s legislative actions are in line with a growing trend among states across the United States. Many states are enacting or amending laws to strengthen the protection against sexual harassment in recent years.
Curtis Surls is an Attorney in the areas of Employment Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, and Wrongful Termination. Located in Manhattan Beach, California, the Law Office of Curt Surls offers a complete range of employment law services to those living throughout Southern California, including all of Los Angeles, Riverside, Orange and San Bernardino counties.
Curt Surls is an Attorney in the areas of Employment Discrimination, Sexual Harassment.
U.S. Supreme Court opinion issued in Epic Systems Corp.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued an opinion that reverses Obama era National Labor Relations Board’s interpretation of the National Labor Relations Act (hereinafter “NLRA”) that individualized arbitration provision in employment contracts were not enforceable.
In Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, the Supreme Court addressed whether employment contract provision requiring individual arbitration between the employer and employee, instead of collective or class action, is enforceable. In doing so, the opinion also decides two other cases presenting substantially the same issue, Ernst & Young, LLP v. Morris and National Labor Relations Board v. Murphy Oil USA, Inc. Ordinarily, Federal Arbitration Act requires that courts recognize and enforce the parties’ arbitration agreement. The exception is where the agreement’s provision violates another federal law. In these cases, the employees argued that the individualized arbitration requirement violates the NLRA.
Employees sought to avoid individualized arbitration due to the Arbitration Act’s savings clause, which “allows courts to refuse to enforce arbitration agreements ‘upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract.’” Employees argued that “illegality under the NLRA is a ‘ground’ that ‘exists at law . . . for the revocation’ of their arbitration agreements, at least to the extent those agreements prohibit class or collective action proceedings.
Epic Systems Corp. and related cases signals a return to pre-2012 era when individualized arbitration provisions were enforced by the courts. Unless the law is amended by Congress, employers will be able to contract with employees to foreclose collective or class action when employment contract dispute arises. The case is Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, No. 16-285, decided May 21, 2018.
Curtis Surls is an Attorney in the areas of Employment Discrimination, Sexual Harassment.
Copyright © 2018-2019 Attorneys, Legal Researchers & Industry Analysts - All Rights Reserved.
Use Contact Form to suggest an attorney or expert.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.