Hollywood Employment Lawyers
The Akopyan Law Firm A.P.C. stands ready to fight for the rights of workers in Hollywood who suffer illegal conduct in the workplace. The firm also stands ready to provide small businesses in Hollywood economical and efficient solutions to problems involving employment law. Our substantial experience in approaching employment disputes from both sides gives us rare insight into the mindset of the opponent, which truly goes a long way to achieving the best possible outcome.
About Hollywood, California
Hollywood is the one neighborhood in Los Angeles which requires no introduction. It is the land of movie stars, rock stars, and other celebrities. However, Hollywood wasn’t always known as tinsel town, and the story of how it turned into the gem that it is today is quite interesting. Hobart Johnstone Whitley – known as the “father of Hollywood” – was a Canadian American businessman and real estate developer who came to California in 1893. At the time Hollywood was a rural settlement of eighteen families which Whitley envisioned turning into “a thriving suburb of Los Angeles.” He arranged to by the 480 acre E.C. Hurd ranch which sits in the segment of modern day Hollywood to the north of the 101 Freeway. He shared his idea with Daeida Hartell Wilcox Beveridge – who later came to be known as the “mother of Hollywood” and she donated 120 acres of her own for the development of Whitley’s vision. By 1900, the region had a post office, newspaper, hotel, and two markets. Hollywood was separated from Los Angeles by ten miles of vineyards, barley fields, and citrus groves. After acquiring the Hurd Ranch Whitley subdivided the land and made significant improvements to the area to attract buyers.
Hollywood was incorporated as a municipality on November 14, 1903, by a vote of 88 for and 77 against. In 1910, the city voted for a merger with Los Angeles in order to secure an adequate water supply and to gain access to the L.A. sewer system. With annexation, the name of the main road in the area was changed from Prospect Avenue to Hollywood Boulevard. By 1912, major motion-picture companies had come west to set up production near or in Los Angeles. By the 1920s, Hollywood was the fifth-largest industry in the nation. During the early 1950s, the State of California constructed the Hollywood Freeway through the northeast corner of Hollywood. The Hollywood Boulevard Commercial and Entertainment District was listed in the National Register of Historic Places in 1985. After the neighborhood underwent years of serious decline in the 1980s, with crime, drugs and increasing poverty among some residents, many landmarks were threatened with demolition. Since 2000, Hollywood has been increasingly gentrified due to revitalization by private enterprise and public planners. Hollywood is situated in Central Los Angeles. Although it covers about three and a half square miles, it is home to almost 90,000 residents, which makes it one of the most densely populated parts of the city. Hollywood encompasses the following zip code 90027. The Akopyan Law Firm A.P.C. is headquartered in Burbank which is just a few miles away from Hollywood. Thus, our lawyers stand ready to serve employees and employers in Hollywood with all their employment law needs.
The Best Hollywood Employment Attorneys Is Just Over The Hill
Finding the right labor lawyer in Hollywood can indeed be a challenging task, given the variety of firms and their differing approaches. It’s essential to recognize that not every employment attorney is suitable for every case, and some may prioritize quick, low-value settlements over more extended legal battles that can lead to a full-value resolution. When conducting an online search for “Hollywood employment lawyer” or “wrongful termination attorney in Hollywood,” you’ll likely encounter numerous advertisements from lawyers who may be inclined to take the easier path. At the Akopyan Law Firm, our Hollywood, California labor lawyers are dedicated to achieving the best possible outcome for each client, regardless of the complexity of the case or the level of effort required.
Our commitment to delivering high-quality legal services means that we limit our practice to a certain number of cases to ensure that each client receives personalized attention and is treated like family. We take pride in providing first-class personal service, and we invite you to read what our clients have to say about their experiences with us. Our relationships with clients often extend beyond the duration of their cases, and our Hollywood employment lawyers are known for their passionate advocacy, as evidenced by the excellent results we have achieved. If you are seeking employment lawyers in Hollywood, please don’t hesitate to contact us for a complimentary case evaluation. We are here to assist you with your employment law needs and are dedicated to fighting zealously on your behalf.
We Can Help Hollywood Residents With All Sorts of Employment Disputes, Including Those Which Involve:
Featured Employment Case
DeJung v. Superior Ct., 169 Cal. App. 4th 533, 87 Cal. Rptr. 3d 99 (2008)
A former court commissioner brought an age discrimination case under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). The Superior Court granted the court’s motion for summary judgment, and the former commissioner appealed. The Court of Appeal held that: (1) the court did not have immunity; (2) genuine issue of material fact as to whether presiding judge’s alleged discriminatory animus influenced the process for selecting a full-time court commissioner precluded summary judgment; and (3) genuine issue of material fact as to whether allegedly legitimate reasons for not allowing commissioner to fill full-time position were pretext for age discrimination precluded summary judgment. The Court discussed the ways in which a FEHA discrimination case could be proven: In employment discrimination cases under Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), plaintiffs can prove their cases in either of two ways: by direct or circumstantial evidence. When a plaintiff proffers circumstantial evidence to prove a Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) discrimination claim, California courts apply the three-stage burden-shifting test established by the United States Supreme Court for trying claims of employment discrimination, including age discrimination, based on a theory of disparate treatment. “Disparate treatment” is intentional discrimination on prohibited grounds.Prohibited discrimination may be found on a theory of “disparate impact,” i.e., that regardless of motive, a facially neutral employer practice or policy, bearing no manifest relationship to job requirements, in fact had a disproportionate adverse effect on members of the protected class.“Direct evidence” of discrimination obviating the need to engage in the McDonnell Douglas burden shifting test is evidence which, if believed, proves the fact of discriminatory animus without inference or presumption; comments demonstrating discriminatory animus may be found to be direct evidence if there is evidence of a causal relationship between the comments and the adverse job action at issue. Where a prima facie case of employment discrimination is made relying on circumstantial evidence, the burden under McDonnell Douglas shifts to the employer to rebut the presumption by producing admissible evidence, sufficient to raise a genuine issue of fact and to justify a judgment for the employer, that its action was taken for a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason; if the employer produces substantial evidence of a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the adverse employment action, the presumption of discrimination created by the prima facie case simply drops out of the picture, and the burden shifts back to the employee to prove intentional discrimination
Millions of Dollars Recovered For Our Clients
Check Out Our Case Results