Just last week, in Sorokunov v. NetApp, Inc., No. A171964, 2026 WL 590943 (Cal. Ct. App. March 3, 2026), the Fourth District Court of Appeal held that an employee lacked standing to prosecute a PAGA claim for Labor Code violations in a civil proceeding after the arbitrator separately ruled against the employee’s same individual Labor Code claims.

In this case, Alexander Sorokunov sued his former employer, NetApp, Inc., seeking damages and civil penalties under the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) for allegedly collecting or receiving wages paid to him, secretly paying him less than promised under a contractual wage scale, and by permitting a discretionary process for determining commissions owed. (Sorokunov did not bring class action claims).

The trial court granted NetApp’s motion to compel arbitration of Sorokunov’s individual non-PAGA Labor Code claims but refused to stay the PAGA claims during the arbitration proceedings. In the arbitration proceeding, the arbitrator ruled against Sorokunov on his individual Labor Code claims.

The trial court granted Net App’s motion for judgment on the pleadings as to Sorokunov’s PAGA claim based on the same Labor Code violations, holding that issue preclusion barred Sorokunov from prosecuting the Labor Code claims under PAGA. Issue preclusion prevents litigation of the same issues in subsequent proceedings, but only if:

1. The issue to be precluded from relitigation is identical to the issue in the prior proceeding;
2. The issue was...

Read Full Story: https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMihgFBVV95cUxQZnp3a2puV1NhRHVyMnNraW5G...