Morin Jacob

Photo of Morin Jacob

Morin Jacob counsels and represents our clients on all labor and employment matters.

She has handled all facets of defense-side state and federal court employment litigation, from pre-litigation through trial and appeal. She has also represented clients in a variety of administrative proceedings, including before the DFEH, EEOC, and EDD. In 2010, Morin first-chaired a five week jury trial for the County of Stanislaus and secured a complete defense verdict on all causes of action.

Morin also has experience in labor negotiations in the public sector. She has represented local agencies in labor negotiations with employee unions.

Latest Articles

On November 13, 2014, the Third Appellate District in Earl v. State Personnel Board held that the notice of intended discipline required to be given to a public safety officer under Government Code Section 3304(d) must actually be provided to the officer within the one-year statute of limitations. Subject to certain exceptions, Government Code Section 3304(d) states that no punitive action or denial of promotion against a peace officer may be taken if the investigation…
On August 11, 2014, the Court of Appeal in People v. Superior Court (Johnson) considered the interplay between the United States Supreme Court’s 1963 decision in Brady v. Maryland, which requires the prosecution’s disclosure of evidence that is favorable and material to the defense (including evidence of dishonesty, bias or moral turpitude on the part of a peace officer) and the statutory discovery procedures articulated by the California Supreme Court in Pitchess v. Superior Court,…
This summer I had the opportunity to attend Harvard Kennedy School of Government’s Senior Executives in State and Local Government course.  It is a 3-week class designed to help state and local government officials, and those of us who serve them, effectively manage operations and employees; and to hone skills to exercise leadership in an environment where agencies face greater scrutiny from a skeptical public, and where the need for services continues to grow despite…
On June 25, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously in the case of Riley v. California, that police may not generally search the cell phones of people they arrest without first getting search warrants. Should the police confront an authentic “now or never” situation, Chief Justice Roberts wrote, they may be entitled to search the cell phone if “exigent circumstances” exist. However, “[t]he fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such…
In 2012, Governor Brown signed Senate Bill 1339 into law which authorized the implementation of a pilot program in the San Francisco Bay Area on commuter benefits.  Senate Bill 1339 authorizes the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (“Air District”) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (“MTC”) to adopt a joint “commuter benefit ordinance” that requires certain employers operating within their jurisdictions to offer employee commuter benefits. The Air District and MTC have now solicited feedback…
On February 26, 2014, the California Supreme Court agreed to review the Court of Appeal decision in Poole v. Orange County Fire Authority. Given the nearly identical language in the Public Safety Officers Bill of Rights Act (“POBR”) as in the Firefighters’ Procedural Bill of Rights Act (“FBOR”), this case will affect law enforcement agencies as well as fire protection agencies. The FBOR, enacted in 2007, was intended to provide firefighters the same rights…
The following questions, which implicate the Public Records Act, are frequently asked:  how long does an agency need to retain and maintain public records? How long does an agency need to retain the recordings of public meetings? The purpose of the Public Records Act (PRA) is to give the public access documents and other stored information in the possession of public agencies. Any citizen may request access to public records.  A public record is “any…
“Liking” something on Facebook is a form of speech protected by the First Amendment, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in Bland et al. v. Roberts, Appeal Number 12-1671, on September 18, 2013.  In doing so, the Court sided with three of six former deputy sheriffs in Virginia who sued for free speech violations, among other claims, after being terminated in violation of the First Amendment for “liking” the Facebook page of the incumbent Sheriff’s…
Many agencies have had the experience of being served with a complaint of harassment, discrimination and/or retaliation filed by an employee with the California Department of Fair Employment & Housing (“DFEH”). Filing such an administrative complaint is a prerequisite to suing in court for damages. There are deadlines associated with an employee’s ability to bring administrative and court complaints. An untimely complaint can save an agency from liability – perhaps even where liability may otherwise…
A case pending in San Diego Superior Court questions the constitutionality of an Ashtanga yoga program provided to students at the Encinitas Union School District. In Sedlock et al v. Baird et al, parents Stephen and Jennifer Sedlock allege that the Ashtanga yoga program is inherently and pervasively religious, having roots in western metaphysical, Hindu, Buddhist, and Taoist religious beliefs and practices.  The Sedlocks seek an order from the Court to stop the teaching of…