EDUCATION
University of Chicago Law School, 1971, JD
Wesleyan University, 1963, BA

AFFILIATIONS
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker
            Associate, 5/71 to 12/78
            Partner, 1/79 to 4/96
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius
            Partner, 5/96 to 9/06
            Counsel to the Firm, 9/06 to present

AREAS OF SUBSTANTIVE EXPERTISE:
Mr. Peterson is an accomplished employment litigator with substantial jury trial experience. He has represented private employers in all aspects of employment law, including wrongful discharge, and federal and state EEO litigation.  Mr. Peterson has defended dozens of class actions involving claims of discrimination, validation studies, and wage and hour issues, most recently trying a wage and hour class action in San Diego Superior Court.

Mr. Peterson has handled many matters before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, as well as Occupational Safety and Health matters (OSHA), organizing campaigns, labor negotiations, arbitrations, and wage/hour matters. He has been involved in the negotiation and defense of project labor agreements.

Mr. Peterson has represented technology companies, including Hitachi Koki Imaging Solutions, Inc., Kokusai Electric, Hitachi Koki Co. Ltd., HomeStore.com, Enterprise Broadcasting Company, Comcast and EMC Corporation.  He has represented retailers such as Federated, K-Mart, Home Depot, Charming Shoppes and Rite Aid and major oil companies, including Texaco, Shell Oil, Union Oil and ConnocoPhillips.

Mr. Peterson has been active in American Bar Association and local bar association matters. He has written and lectured extensively on a variety of employment matters. Before attending law school, he served in the U.S. Navy, attaining the rank of lieutenant.

BAR ADMISSIONS:
California
U.S. District Court, Northern District of California
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California
U.S. District Court, Central District of California
U.S. District Court, Southern District of California
U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Supreme Court of the United States

REPRESENTATIVE TRIALS/LITIGATION EXPERIENCE:

• Albrecht et al. v. Rite Aid Corporation, et al. (San Diego Sup. Ct.) (wage and hour case involving allegations of a failure to pay overtime and violations of Business and Professions Code § 17200 – class certified; case resolved after motion to decertify with a two year structured settlement very favorable to client)
• Miller et al. v. Fairchild Industries, Inc., (C.D. Calif.) (race discrimination claim – summary judgment for defendant reversed by Ninth Circuit, 797 F.2d 727 (1986); directed verdict reversed by Ninth Circuit, 885 F.2d 498 (1989); final verdict for defendant)
• Mellor v. Softworks, et al. (N.D. Calif.) (sexual harassment and retaliation claim with cross-complaint for indemnification and misappropriation of company materials – settled for nuisance value after plaintiff deposed)
• Leal v. Lane Bryant, (Alameda Sup. Ct.) (class action wage and hour case resolved by settlement favorable to the client)
• Washington v. Angelus Sanitary Can Machine Company, (Los Angeles Sup. Ct.) (plaintiff sought compensation for injuries received in an altercation with a fellow employee and for wrongful termination – after protracted and acrimonious discovery resulting in plaintiff’s counsel withdrawing from the case, defendant was granted summary judgment)
• California School of Culinary Arts v. Lujan, California Labor Commissioner, et al. 112 Cal. App. 4th 16 (2003) (action brought by school to have faculty declared exempt from wage hour laws, resulting in summary judgment for plaintiff.  The State of California appealed.  Judgment for the school affirmed)
• White v. Southland Box Company (Los Angeles Sup. Ct.) (a race discrimination and racial harassment brought by four African Americans – summary judgment granted, only to be reversed by the Court of Appeal with respect to the racial harassment portion of the case.  The case settled for a modest amount.)
• Bell v. Rite Aid Corporation (Los Angeles Sup. Ct.) (complaint for wages unpaid – a class was certified; a quick settlement was achieved that was extremely favorable to the client)
• Kozminski v. Charming Shoppes, (Orange County Sup. Ct.) (class action involving allegation that store managers were misclassified as exempt settled for a modest amount before class certified)
• Brown v. Albertsons, et al., (Los Angeles Sup. Ct.) (represented Charming Shoppes in class action matter involving 109 separate classes alleging violations of the Labor Code prohibition against including questions in one’s application with respect to misdemeanor marijuana convictions)
• Johnson v. Lennar, (Orange County Sup. Ct.) (action by alleged whistleblower involving allegations of internal issues.  Case settled favorably on eve of trial)
• Sanford v. Career Education Association, et al., (Los Angeles Sup. Ct.) (age discrimination and wrongful discharge case, settled for a modest amount)
• Winch v. Brooks College, et al., (Los Angeles Sup. Ct.) (sex discrimination brought by a male employee against his female supervisor, settled after plaintiff’s deposition for nuisance value)
• Puerta v. California Institute of Technology (Los Angeles Sup. Ct.) (a national origin discrimination and wrongful discharge case – we were brought in on the eve of trial; after several motions, summary judgment was granted and upheld on appeal)
• Servatius v. Harveys Casino Resort (9th Jud. Dist. of Nevada) (breach of contract – court order obtained compelling binding arbitration under arbitration clause in employment agreement; settled on favorable terms during arbitration)
• Fernandez v. California Institute of Technology (Los Angeles Sup. Ct.) (national origin and constructive discharge case – case settled at eve of trial for very modest sum)
• Associated General Contractors v. Metropolitan Water District (S.D. Calif.) (action to preclude the negotiation of a Project Labor Agreement asserting such agreements are precluded by ERISA – summary judgment for defendant sustained by the Ninth Circuit, 159 F.3d 1178 (1998))
• Cortright v. Rite Aid Corporation (N.D. Calif.) (action for age and disability discrimination – motion for class certification denied; case settled for a modest amount.)
• Pap v. California Institute of Technology (Los Angeles Sup. Ct.) (suit for indemnification by employee; settled for a modest amount after the employee lost her Superior Court trial)
• Fernandez v. International Aluminum Corporation (Los Angeles Sup. Ct.) (sexual harassment and wrongful termination case – settled for four figures immediately before picking the jury)
• Martin v. Texaco Inc. (C.D. Calif.; Los Angeles Sup. Ct.) (sex discrimination case– originally filed as a class action, class certification defeated in Federal Court; case tried in State Court; verdict for plaintiff overturned by the Superior Court sustained by the Court of Appeal; settled midway through the second trial on a basis very favorable to defendant)
• Suastez v. Plastic Dress-Up Co. (Los Angeles Sup. Ct.) (the seminal vacation pay case in California – obtained verdict in trial court; sustained by Court of Appeal; reversed by the California Supreme Court 31 Cal.3d 774 (1982))
• Armstrong v. Office Depot. (San Diego Sup. Ct.) (Class action for unpaid vacation pay; defense verdict obtained in trial to the bench.)
• Scott v. Maersk (Orange County Sup. Ct.) (A misclassification class action, the individual plaintiffs are pursuing their claims after class certification was denied; the denial of class certification was sustained by the appellate court in an unpublished opinion.)

PUBLICATIONS

• Contributing author, Occupational Safety and Health Law
• Author, “Work and Public Notification,” Environmental Law Practice Guide, Matthew Bender & Co.
• Author, California OSHA Compliance Handbook, Government Institutes