Jolina Abrena, an Associate in the Los Angeles office, represents Liebert Cassidy Whitmore clients in all matters pertaining to labor and employment law. An experienced litigator, Jolina has extensive experience in all aspects of the litigation process, including trials and giving oral argument before the California Courts of Appeal. She represents clients at administrative hearings, and advises them about compliance with employment discrimination laws, the Fair Labor Standards Act, California Labor Code, the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, and the Peace Officers Bill of Rights Act. Jolina represents public agencies and non-profit organizations with respect to charges filed with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the California Labor Commissioner, and in audits conducted by the U.S. Department of Labor.
Professional Involvement
Jolina is a member of good standing of the Los Angeles County Bar Association and the Asian Pacific American Bar Association. Jolina is also a member of the Association of Southern California Defense Counsel, National Employment Council, Professionals in Human Resources Association, and the Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles.
Recognitions
Jolina was recognized as Southern California Super Lawyer in 2015, 2016 and 2017.
BA, University of California, San Diego
JD, Loyola Marymount University School of Law
APPELLATE
Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007) - The California Court of Appeal held that removing a deputy sheriff from his special assignment as a pilot "without a concomitant loss of rank or pay" is not a punitive action which entitles the deputy sheriff to an administrative appeal under the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act.
LITIGATION
Muneton v. Los Angeles Unified School District (2019) - Twelve former motor unit police officers claimed whistleblower retaliation and retaliation for reporting alleged illegal conduct under Education Code 44113 and the Labor Code. When the Chief of Police commissioned an audit, it revealed that the motor unit was operating at a loss due to the officers' lack of productivity, the infighting within the unit and their resistance to supervision, and the unit was disbanded. LCW filed seven separate motions and the Court granted all seven motions, resulting in a complete dismissal.
BA, University of California, San Diego
JD, Loyola Marymount University School of Law
BA, University of California, San Diego
JD, Loyola Marymount University School of Law