A Local Law Firm With An

international reach

Though we are a California based firm, through our membership association of over 190 independent highly-rated law firms worldwide, we provide clients with representation throughout the US and the world.

Representing Businesses and Their Owners

Since its inception, Coleman & Horowitt, LLP has focused its practice to provide a full range of services to businesses and their owners.

A Commitment to the Community

Coleman & Horowitt, LLP believes it’s not enough to merely provide exceptional service and advice to our clients. We also have a duty to serve the community.

We Have The Professionalism Of

25 YEARS OF SERVICE WITH OVER 100 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE

Coleman & Horowitt, LLP was established in 1994 by William H. Coleman and Darryl J. Horowitt.

  • Latest In The News

    DYNAMEX RETROACTIVE? YES, BUT …

    Download a PDF of the article here  On April 30, 2018, the California Supreme Court handed down a key decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903. This ruling, a landmark in the state’s labor law, set out the requirements for companies to classify workers as independent contractors. It was later made into law in 2019 by AB 5. Nearly three years later, in January of 2021, the Supreme Court in Vasquez v. Jan-Pro Franchising International, Inc. (2021) ___ Cal.5th ___, went even further, confirming in a unanimous ruling that the Dynamex holding applies retroactively. This has significant implications for all companies doing business in California. Essentially, the decision and the follow-up legislation are backed by organized labor, have their eye on the so-called “gig economy” and make it much, much harder for workers to be classified as independent contractors rather than employees. A little background. In 2018, the Dynamex holding replaced the so-called Borello standard, which established a multi-factor test for determining whether a worker was an employee or an independent contractor, largely based on the company’s control over the worker. Dynamex adopted a new “ABC test” which, rather than requiring a worker to prove they’re an employee, assumes they are unless the employer can demonstrate that the worker is: (A) not under the company’s control; (B) doing work that’s outside the company’s usual course of business; and (C) is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation or business. Following this decision, and the enactment of AB5, a key question remained unanswered – would the new ruling and test be applicable retroactively? In other words, could the test be applied (and lawsuits be filed) against companies for activities prior to the issuance of the Dynamex decision in 2018? In Vasquez, the court responded with a firm “Yes”. Actually, however, it’s more of a “Yes, but …” Dynamex will now apply to cases that were filed, but not decided, in April 2018 as well as claims involving events prior to April. There are, however, a number of factors that limit its impact. First, under Proposition 22, which voters approved in November of last year, app-based drivers (Uber, Lyft, etc.) are exempt. Second, for a variety of reasons, whether Dynamex and Vasquez apply to a given work or workers is very fact-based – many jobs are not affected, depending on the job that’s being done and the nature of the case. And finally there’s the limitations period. In California, the statute of limitations for labor-related lawsuits is, in general, three years. So, even if Dynamex is applicable, because the decision was handed down on the last day of April, 2018, the retroactive window is getting closer and closer to being fully closed, and at the end of April, 2021, it will close for good. There may or may not be a flurry of last-minute filings prior to the end of April, but as always, if you suspect the employee/independent contractor issue may be a live one for you, consult with counsel. In fact, before deciding to categorize someone working for your organization, you should consult with counsel to make sure the person qualifies as an independent contractor either under the ABC test or an exception to the rule. If you have questions, contact the head of our labor and employment practices group, Gregory J. Norys, at (559) 248-4820 or gnorys@ch-law.com.  

    view the article
  • Latest In The News

    Collecting Money in the Time of Covid

      In this webinar, Darryl Horowitt and Sheryl Noel discuss steps your business can take to reduce your exposure to businesses who do not pay.  They also discuss remedies you have once a customer defaults, including remedies in bankruptcy court. We have provided two articles below for further reading and information. Watch it Here: https://youtu.be/0ODomvMi-VU Jump to various sections in the presentation. Times for the beginning of each section are below: How to Avoid a Collections Problem – 3:39 Identifying a Collections Problem – Don’t Let it Get Started – 11:29 Steps to Take if a Collection Problem Arises – 14:51 Legal Remedies – 22:55 Alternatives to Litigation – You Mean I Don’t Have to Sue? – 50:30 Bankruptcy Issues – Yes, You Can Do Something in Bankruptcy – 53:49 Presentation Slides are Available Here: https://ch-law.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Collections-in-the-Time-of-Covid-.pdf Articles:  PREVENTATIVE COLLECTION DOCUMENTING YOUR CREDIT TRANSACTION EFFECTIVE COMMERCIAL COLLECTION TECHNIQUES    

    view the article
  • Latest In The News

    OPERATING AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT OF HUSBANDRY VEHICLES WITHOUT A SLOW- MOVING VEHICLE EMBLEM CAN GET FARMERS IN TROUBLE, FAST

    Download a PDF of the article here  Over my last 25 years, as a lawyer practicing in the Central Valley of California, I have defended many farming operations and their employees, for accidents which involved tractors, trailers, or other moveable equipment referred to in Vehicle Code section 36000 as an “implement of husbandry.” These vehicles and equipment are typically designed and maintained to be operated at speeds of 25 miles per hour or less, and because of this fact, they have to be equipped with a “slow-moving vehicle emblem”, which is often referred to as a “reflective triangle.” In past cases, liability against my clients sometimes hinged on the proper installation and display of a slow- moving vehicle emblem. Keep reading the article here: https://ch-law.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Slow-Move-AG-Article-Updated.pdf

    view the article
  • Latest In The News

    Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccination

    Download a PDF of the article here After a long, slow, hopeful decline in both cases and fatalities, the COVID-19 pandemic reignited in the United States beginning in November of 2020. Although the curve, thankfully, is now rapidly trending down, the massive increase in cases has highlighted the question of the legal standing of employers who want their employees vaccinated. With over 50 million vaccinations administered nationwide, this has become a live issue. We will thus address this in the article found here: https://ch-law.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Mandatory-Covid-Vaccination-article-final.pdf

    view the article
  • Latest In The News

    COLEMAN & HOROWITT SEEKS ATTORNEYS

    Coleman & Horowitt, LLP, a litigation and transactions firm representing businesses and their owners, is looking to grow our Fresno and Bakersfield offices. We have grown tremendously in recent months. To support the Firm’s growth, we are seeking attorneys for positions in our Fresno and Bakersfield offices that you can learn more about here: https://ch-law.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/PR-CH-Attorney-Search.pdf Visit Our Careers Page Here:https://ch-law.com/careers-sonora-fresno-visalia-bakersfield-newportbeach-losangeles/

    view the article

An introduction to

Coleman & Horowitt