Temple City Employment Attorneys
The trial attorneys of the Akopyan Law Firm A.P.C. stand ready to fight for the rights of the residents of Temple City, regardless of whether they are employees or employers. If your cause is just and involves employment law, give us a call to see how we can help.
Temple City, California
Temple City is a city in Los Angeles County which is home to more than 30,000 residents. It covers approximately three square miles, and encompasses the following zip codes: 91007, 91775, 91776, and 91780. The town was originally named “City of Temple” after its founder, Walter Temple, but the United States Postmaster General Harry Stewart New demanded a name change in 1926 because the mail was accidentally being directed to the Phoenix suburb of Tempe. It was officially designated “Temple City” but remained a city in name only until after the post–World War II population explosion followed by incorporation on May 25, 1960, which resulted in the redundant name: “City of Temple City”. (This redundancy is shared with other cities in California, such as the City of California City.) Temple City has earned the nickname “The City of Trees” due to its commitment to preserving and planting trees throughout the city. The National Arbor Day Foundation has recognized Temple City as a “Tree City USA.” Temple City hosts an annual Camellia Festival, celebrating the city’s official flower, the camellia. The festival features a parade, carnival rides, food vendors, and entertainment. The Akopyan Law Firm A.P.C. is headquartered in Burbank which is minutes away from Temple City. Our employment lawyers stand ready to provide legal services to both employees and employers in Temple City.
Ways to Identify The Best Employment Lawyer in Temple City
Temple City, a thriving community, offers its residents a multitude of options when it comes to legal representation. A simple online search for “Temple City employment lawyer” or “wrongful termination attorney in Temple City” will yield a plethora of paid advertisements from employment lawyers across various locations. However, selecting the right attorney can be a challenging task when relying solely on paid internet advertisements. It’s often difficult to discern an attorney’s expertise and experience in handling employment trials and litigation from these ads. At the Akopyan Law Firm, A.P.C., each of our attorneys boasts nearly two decades of experience in employment law. Our track record of success extends to both employees and employers, showcasing our commitment to delivering positive outcomes. We prioritize quality over quantity, ensuring that each case receives the attention and care it deserves. Our offices are conveniently located just minutes away from Temple City, and we are prepared to provide residents with top-tier legal representation. If you’re seeking an attorney with a proven track record, look no further than the Akopyan Law Firm, where quality legal services are our hallmark.
Our Lawyers Can Help Temple City Residents With:
Featured Employment Case
Singh v. Southland Stone, U.S.A., Inc., 186 Cal. App. 4th 338, 112 Cal. Rptr. 3d 455 (2010)
An alien former employee brought action against former employer and its president for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unpaid wages, false promise, wrongful termination in violation of public policy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, promissory estoppel, and misrepresentation to induce relocation for employment. The Superior Court granted motion for non-suit on the breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unpaid wages, wrongful termination, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, denied it on the others, and entered judgment following jury trial in favor of former employee. The former employer’s and president’s motions for new trial and judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) were denied. On appeal the Court of Appeal held as follows: 1 court properly instructed the jury not to consider former employee’s visa petition as evidence of a collateral agreement regarding length of employment contract; 2 employment was at will; 3 former employee was not entitled to continue to receive $10,000 monthly salary during employment; 4 new trial was required by jury’s inconsistent special verdict findings; 5 jury instruction that former employee could not be awarded duplicative damages on different counts should not have been used with special verdict; 6 workers’ compensation exclusivity rule applied to any emotional injury from president’s misconduct; and 7 exclusivity rule did not apply to former employee’s claims for promissory estoppel, misrepresentation to induce relocation for employment, false promise, intentional misrepresentation, concealment, or for unpaid wages.
Millions of Dollars Recovered For Our Clients
Check Out Our Case Results