Calvin Chang

Calvin Chang

Attorney Profile

Top Rated Employment Litigation Attorney in Sacramento, CA

Law Office of Calvin Chang
 | 980 9th Street, 16th Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-538-0225
Selected To Rising Stars: 2019 - 2020
Practice Areas:
  • Employment Litigation: Plaintiff (90%),
  • International (10%)
Languages Spoken:
  • English,
  • Chinese-Cantonese
Attorney Profile

Mr. Chang's practice areas include litigating claims on behalf of individuals for wrongful termination, employment discrimination, sexual harassment, whistleblower retaliation, and wage and hour claims.

White Papers

  • How to get an employment lawyer; recommendations for employees seeking legal representation (2017) - Recommendations for how to get an employment attorney to represent you.First, you should only contact attorneys who represent employees in employment matters. If you randomly submit information requests to any law firm, you risk the possibility that the firm you contact may represent your employer. Do not expect attorneys to seek you out. There are prohibitions on attorney live solicitation that may or may not apply in your case, but most attorneys do not want to risk violating rules of professional responsibility. Most employment attorneys receive many more requests for legal representation than they can accept and only will accept a very small percentage of cases. It is not unusual for an attorney to only accept less than five percent of the cases from prospective client contacts. Employment lawsuits are expensive and time consuming. An attorney who agrees to represent you in an employment lawsuit may spend hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars on your case. A prospective attorney is thinking whether or not they want to invest in you and your case. If you are having trouble finding an attorney for your case, there are several possibilities: · The way in which you are contacting prospective attorneys is not effective (i.e. you leave a voice mail message, when the firm is requesting that you submit an online contact). · Your previous attorney withdrew from representing you. (This may be a red flag that tells other attorneys they will be next to have a problem with the way you are approaching your role as a client). · You are not looking in the right place for the right kind of attorney; · You are a public sector employee and have contacted attorneys who do not practice in public sector employment law. · Your case does not have as much value as you think; · You are not providing the prospective attorney with a sufficient written description of your legal issue. · You are providing too much information that causes the attorney to think your case is too complex with too many issues that will cost too much time and money to litigate. · You may not be making a good impression. Your communications should be professional, and you should not sound like you are making disparaging comments about your employer or co-workers. · Although you may be upset; sounding too irate or angry might scare away attorney’s who might believe they will have a hard time convincing a jury that you are a reasonable plaintiff and it is your employer who has acted unreasonably. Because there are more potential clients available that there are available plaintiff’s attorneys, you should stand out from the beginning as able to articulate the facts of your case. Provide detailed yet succinct description of your legal problem. If you are only able to phone an attorney and leave a message, assume some attorney’s simply will not call you back because they do not have the time to speak to you on the phone. If you are seeking representation, have a professional one-page written description prepared and send it to attorney’s who appear to match the type of legal issue you have. (Your communication with a prospective attorney is confidential – as long as you do not disclose it to anyone other than your attorney or prospective attorney) Employment attorneys need certain information in order to evaluate your case: The name of the employer; the name of any individual defendants; If the employee was fired, denied employment, laid off, denied a reasonable; accommodation, or whatever the issue is, in ten words or less; The dates that these things happened; The employers stated reason for what they did to you; How long you were employed for the employer; What was your job title; What was your monthly salary?; Have you filed your complaint with any agencies like the DFEH or EEOC? · Provide the attorney with a succinct timeline of events with a brief factual description of each significant event. To find a plaintiffs employment attorney in California, please go to the web site of the California Employment Lawyers Association (CELA). CELA is the largest and most influential bar association in the state for attorneys who represent working people. The web site is, and you can search for attorneys by location and practice area. As you can see, trying to find legal representation for an employment lawsuit takes a lot of work and commitment on your part. It is no different than trying to find a job. So – approach every contact with a prospective attorney as if you were interviewing for a job. Be professional, competent, courteous, and promptly respond to a prospective attorney’s communication with you. I hope you can resolve your situation and wish you the best.

  • Discrimination in California Business Establishments (2017) - Unruh Civil Rights Act Discrimination in California Business Establishments: What to do if you are denied service at a business because of your gender or sexual orientation. In California, restaurants, hotels, and any other business establishments are prohibited from engaging in discrimination in providing services. The Unruh Civil Rights Act provides a legal remedy to anyone denied the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments. Even though the Unruh Act itself only specifies sex, color, race, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, marital status, or sexual orientation or to persons regardless of their genetic information, it has been held by California courts to apply to other forms of discrimination as well. Yet certain types of discrimination are permissible. For example, price discounts based on age (students or seniors) have been permissible based on public policy. A person who is denied a service by a business establishment is entitled to recover treble damages and maybe also recover punitive damages in certain circumstances. In order to have a valid claim certain elements must be met: (1) A person must prove that he/she was denied full and equal services by a business; (2) a substantial motivating reason for the denial must have been the business' perception of the person's protected status. If these two elements are met, a person is entitled to a minimum statutory recovery of $4,000 per violation. Furthermore, if a person can prove the violations caused actual damages, they may be entitled to three times the amount of damages. A successfully plaintiff is also entitled to an award of attorney's fees. Courts can also issue an order prohibiting the business from engaging in further violations. A claim under the Unruh Act must be brought within two years of the violation. However, you should not delay in contacting an attorney to start the claims process and to preserve any evidence. What to do If you experience discrimination, you should do several things: (1) ask to speak to a manager if possible; (2) be sure you actually tried to obtain the service, not merely made an inquiry about the policy of the business (3) get the name of the person who denied you service; (4) write down the date/time of the denial; (5) and try to get the name of any witnesses; (6) write down what was said. The Unruh Act does not apply to employment discrimination. Employment and housing discrimination are covered under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. Hate violence and intimidation are covered under the Ralph Civil Rights Act.

  • About Calvin Chang

    Admitted: 2011, California

    Professional Webpage:


    • Top 100 Trial Lawyers National Trial Lawyers Association 2017 Best Employment Lawyers Three Best Rated 2016 Top 10% Lawyers of Distinction 2016 Best in Employment Law Sacramento Small Business Excellence 2016 AVVO Rated Superb AVVO Top Lawyer

    Bar/Professional Activity:

    • State of California State Personnel BoardAdmitted to Practice 2015 - Present United States District Court for the Northern District of California Admitted to Practice 2015 - Present Capital City Trial Lawyers AssociationMember2014 - Present State Bar of CaliforniaHousing & Public Accommodation Subsection 2012 - Present Asian Pacific Bar Association of Sacramento Member 2012 - Presen tSacramento County Bar AssociationMember 2011 - Present United States District Court for the Eastern District of CaliforniaAdmitted 2011 - Present SacLEGALSustaining Member 2008 - Present State Bar of California, Labor and Employment Law SectionMember 2008 - Present National Employment Lawyers AssociationMember 2007 - Present California Employment Lawyers AssociationMentor, Public Sector Committee 2007 - Present Consumer Attorney Association of Los AngelesMember 2010 - 2014, 2011


    • Client v. Public Agency Employer   Practice Area: Sexual harassment Date: Dec 01, 2016 Outcome: Confidential Six Figure Settlement Description: Peace officer subjected to discrimination on the job. Client v. Public Agency Employer   Practice Area: Employment and labor Date: Dec 01, 2015 Outcome: Confidential Six Figure Settlement Description: Peace Officer subjected to discrimination on the job. Public Accommodations Discrimination   Practice Area: Civil rights Date: Oct 01, 2015 Outcome: Confidential Settlement Description: Represented client in Unruh Civil Rights Act public accommodations transgender discrimination case v. fortune 500 corporation Public Accommodations Discrimination   Practice Area: Civil rights Date: Oct 17, 2014 Outcome: Judgment for client Description: Successfully represented client in a denial of public accommodations case under the California Unruh Civil Rights Act Client v. Hotel   Practice Area: Civil rights Date: Oct 17, 2014 Outcome: Confidential Settlement Description: Denial of Equal Public Accommodations in Violation of Unruh Civil Rights Act Unpaid wages, whistleblower retaliation   Practice Area: Employment and labor Date: Jan 01, 2013 Outcome: Confidential Settlement Description: Successfully represented client in a whistleblower retaliation, wrongful termination, and wage and hour case against employer    Hate Crime   Practice Area: Discrimination Date: Dec 27, 2012 Outcome: Confidential Settlement Description: Race Discrimination and Harassment under the Fair Employment and Housing Act; Ralph Hate Violence; Constructive Discharge: Manager displayed a weapon and called client racial slur. International Client v. Corporate Defendant   Practice Area: Commercial real estate Date: Jul 20, 2012 Outcome: Exposed sham corporate office Description: Represented European client defrauded by defendant who was using a sham California business headquarters. Client v. Corporate Defendant and Individual Employer   Practice Area: Employment and labor Date: Jun 06, 2012 Outcome: Confidential Settlement Description: Employee subjected to race/national origin discrimination; whistle blower retaliation, 2011

    Other Outstanding Achievements:

    • Mr. Chang’s practice areas include litigating claims on behalf of individuals for employment discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and civil rights. Mr. Chang has also prosecuted cases under the Ralph Civil Rights Act for cases of hate violence. Mr. Chang has over two decades of experience in the public sector, including over fifteen years as a sworn peace officer, including as a patrol officer, investigator, supervising investigator, special agent, and senior special agent. Mr. Chang was formerly a supervising investigator for one of California’s largest law enforcement agencies, where he supervised a team of investigators, conducting internal affairs, and equal employment opportunity investigations. Mr. Chang was previously Chief Executive Officer of National Flare Company, Inc. At National Flare, Mr. Chang developed, patented, and manufactured, a new safety device for road flares that reduced the number of end user injuries previously associated with the industry standard. Mr. Chang received his Juris Doctor from Concord Law School where he was a distinguished scholar and distinguished Oral Advocate in a Plaintiff’s ADA case. Mr. Chang received his BA in Political Science at the University of California at Davis, and a Masters in Criminal Justice at Boston University., 2017

    Educational Background:

    • Concord Law School Boston University University of California at Davis
    Show More
    Office Location for Calvin Chang

    980 9th Street
    16th Floor
    Sacramento, CA 95814

    Calvin Chang:

    Last Updated: 2/25/2020

    Page Generated: 0.26516699790955 sec