North Hills Employment Attorneys
The skilled labor attorneys at Akopyan Law Firm A.P.C. are fully prepared to advocate for the rights and interests of both employers and employees in North Hills, California.
North Hills, California
North Hills is a neighborhood of the City of Los Angeles. It is situated in the center-north section of the San Fernando Valley and is home to more than 50,000 Angelenos. The neighborhood is comprised of two administrative sections: North Hills East, and North Hills West. North Hills is largely residential in nature. It covers approximately five square miles and encompasses the following zip code: 91343. North Hills was originally part of an agricultural community known as Mission Acres. The community saw significant growth between the 1930s and the 1950s. After WWII, the newly developed suburban community was renamed Sepulveda, after the prominent Sepúlveda family of California. In 1991, it was renamed North Hills. 1991, residents of the western half of Sepulveda, west of the San Diego Freeway, voted to secede from the eastern section to form a new community named North Hills. The City of Los Angeles soon changed the name of the remaining Sepulveda are to North Hills also. The city then formed a new sub-neighborhood of “North Hills West” which begins west of the 405 freeway and goes to Bull Creek Wash/Balboa Blvd. and from Roscoe Blvd. to Devonshire St. The eastern section became the sub-neighborhood of North Hills East. The Akopyan Law Firm A.P.C. is headquartered in the City of Los Angeles which is minutes away from North Hills. The Akopyan Law Firm, A.P.C. stands ready to provide legal services to both employees and employers in North Hills.
Where North Hills Residents Can Find The Best Wrongful Termination Lawyers
While North Hills thrives as a community, it is primarily considered a bedroom community, which implies a scarcity of lawyers or law firms operating within its boundaries. Conducting a Google search for “North Hills employment lawyer” often results in paid advertisements from other employment attorneys situated in surrounding areas like downtown Los Angeles or Century City. Choosing the right attorney, with the necessary expertise and experience, can be challenging when relying on paid advertisements from non-local lawyers. Finding a legal professional well-versed in this specific field of law and experienced in handling such disputes is more intricate than it may initially appear. At the Akopyan Law Firm, A.P.C., each of our attorneys boasts nearly two decades of experience. Our legal team has established a solid track record of success, representing both employers and employees effectively. We adhere to a philosophy that prioritizes quality over quantity. With offices located just a short distance from North Hills, we are readily available to offer the highest-caliber legal representation to North Hills residents.
We Stand Ready To Help North Hills Residents With Matters Involving:
Featured Employment Case
A former employee sued for wrongful termination and nonpayment of wages. The Superior Court granted the employer summary judgment, but denied employer’s postjudgment motion for attorney fees. Employee and employer appealed. The Court of Appeal held that: (a) employee raised triable issue of fact whether termination was result of pregnancy discrimination, and (b) retention bonus did not form basis of action for breach of implied contract or breach of covenant of good faith. The opinion confirmed that an employee’s showing of prima facie case of discriminatory termination raises a presumption of discrimination, shifting to the employer the burden of producing evidence to establish a genuine issue that the termination was made for a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason. If the employer shows nondiscriminatory reason for termination, the presumption of discrimination disappears, but the employee, who retains the overall burden of persuasion, may then yet seek to show discriminatory motive, by evidence that the employer’s proffered reason was false and a pretext, and any other evidence of discriminatory motive. Defendant employer moving for summary judgment in employee’s action for discriminatory termination, who relies on a showing of nondiscriminatory reasons for the discharge, satisfies its burden as moving party if it presents evidence of such nondiscriminatory reasons that would permit a trier of fact to find, more likely than not, that they were the basis for the termination.
Kelly v. Stamps.com Inc., 135 Cal. App. 4th 1088, 38 Cal. Rptr. 3d 240 (2005), as modified (Jan. 20, 2006)
Millions of Dollars Recovered For Our Clients
Check Out Our Case Results