Blog Feed: Your source of news and discussion of cutting edge class action issues, both in California and Nationwide
| Home | My Account | Directories |
Two New Arbitration Decisions of Note: Samaniego v. Empire Today LLC and O'Brien v. Am. Express Co.
Published on 2012-05-10 10:52:00
In Samaniego v. Empire Today LLC, 2012 Cal. App. LEXIS 540 (April 5, 2012), the First District (Division Three) upheld a trial court order which declined to enforce arbitration of class-wide wage claims based on a finding of unconscionability under the Armendariz test. > read more
Southern District Finds Waiver Argument Unpersuasive Post-Brinker; Certifies Meal and Rest Period Claims On Behalf of “Piece Rate” Workers: Schulz v. Qualxserv
Published on 2012-05-02 10:41:00
On April 26, 2012, Southern District Court Judge, Hon. Anthony J. Battaglia, certified a swath of wage and hour claims on behalf of computer repair “field service technicians” who were paid by way of a piece-rate compensation. > read more
California Supreme Court Splits the Baby on Fee Issue: Kirby v. Immoos Fire Protection, Inc
Published on 2012-04-30 13:46:00
On April 30, 2012, the California Supreme Court issued its ruling in Kirby v. Immoos Fire Protection, Inc, __ Cal. 4th __ (2012), concluding that neither section 1194 nor section 218.5 authorizes an award of attorney’s fees to a party that prevails on a section 226.7 claim:We granted review to consider when, if ever, a party who prevails on a section 226.7 action for an alleged failure to provide rest breaks may be awarded attorney’s fees. We conclude, in light of the relevant statutory lang [..] > read more
California Supreme Court to Issue Ruling in Kirby v. Immoos Fire Protection, Inc. on Monday (April 30, 2012)
Published on 2012-04-27 13:52:00
The statement > read more
Second District (Division 3) Declines to Weigh-in on Gentry Issue: Kinecta Alternative Financial Solutions, Inc. v. Superior Court
Published on 2012-04-27 13:44:00
On April 25, 2012, the Second District (Division 3) issued an opinion concluding that a trial court erred by denying a motion to dismiss class allegations from the plaintiff’s complaint (filed concurrently with a motion to compel arbitration) when the > read more
Unpacking The Brinker Court’s Analysis Of Certification Issues Particular to Meal and Rest Period Claims: Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court
Published on 2012-04-20 16:00:00
As promised, this final post will examine the Brinker Court’s meal and rest break certification analysis. > read more
Unpacking The Brinker Court’s Class Certification Analysis: Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court
Published on 2012-04-14 13:17:00
As I indicated in my prior post (located here), the real value of the Brinker opinion, at least from the plaintiff’s perspective, lays in the Court’s certification analysis. > read more
Unpacking The Brinker Court’s Construction Of California’s Meal and Rest Break Provisions
Published on 2012-04-12 21:09:00
Having had some time to digest the Court’s opinion, the most surprising aspect (at least in my mind), is that the Court’s opinion is largely non-surprising. > read more
California Supreme Court Reverses Court of Appeal, in Part: Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court
Published on 2012-04-12 12:47:00
The California Supreme Court has finally ruled, issuing a 63 page opinion that addresses questions pertaining to both certification and the construction of California meal/rest break laws. > read more
California Supreme Court to Issue Ruling in Brinker Restaurant v. Superior Court Tomorrow (April 12, 2012):
Published on 2012-04-11 12:41:00
Just > read more
Northern District Certifies Overtime Class Based on Failure to Incorporate Bonus Pay Into Hourly Overtime Rate: Chavez v. Lumber Liquidators
Published on 2012-03-28 13:16:00
On March 26, 2012, United States District Court Judge, Samuel Conti, granted class certification against Lumber Liquidators, in part, on the theory that the defendant had failed to take bonus pay into account in calculating the overtime rate for California non-exempt employees. > read more
California Supreme Court To Review Concepcion's Impact On The Armendariz Balancing Test: Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co. LLC
Published on 2012-03-26 11:14:00
On March 21, 2012, the California Supreme Court granted review of the Second District’s decision in Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co., LLC, 201 Cal. App. 4th 74 (2011) – previously discussed here – which upheld a denial of a motion to compel arbitration in a proposed CLRA class action. > read more
Southern District Declines to Enforce Class Action Waiver Secured After Filing of Lawsuit: Balasanyan v. Nordstrom, Inc.
Published on 2012-03-12 12:15:00
On March 8, 2012, Southern District Court Judge, Jeffrey T. Miller, denied an employer’s motion to compel individual arbitration based on an arbitration agreement that was amended to include a class action waiver provision two months after the proposed class action complaint was filed. See Balasanyan v. Nordstrom, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30809 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 8, 2012). In denying the motion, the Court reasoned that the employer’s efforts to revise the agreement – post filing of the l [..] > read more
Fourth District Concludes Unpaid Wages Are A Component of PAGA Penalties Under Section 558: Thurman v. Bayshore Traffic
Published on 2012-03-01 09:56:00
On February 27, 2012, the Fourth District (Division 1) issued an opinion in Thurman v. Bayshore Traffic etc., __ Ca.App.4th __ (2012) concluding that “unpaid wages” were a proper component of the PAGA penalty provided for under Labor Code Section 558. That statute expressly states that the $50/$100 liquidated penalty amount is “in addition to an amount sufficient to recover underpaid wages” [Cal. Lab. Code § 558(a)(1)-(2)], and proscribes that the “[w]ages recovered pursuant to this [..] > read more
First District Holds That Trial Court Erred In Using Sampling Evidence To Establish Class-Wide Liability: Duran v. United States Bank National Association
Published on 2012-02-07 16:40:00
On February 6, 2012, the First District Court of Appeal (Division 1) reversed a $15 million wage judgment in Duran v. United States Bank Nat’l Ass’n, __ Cal. App. 4th __ (2012), based on the Court’s finding that trial court erred in relying upon representative sampling evidence to find class-wide liability: The plaintiffs in the class action are 260 current and former business banking officers (BBO's) who claimed they were misclassified by USB as outside sales personnel exempt from Califor [..] > read more
First District Dismisses Appeal Challenging Trial Court’s Refusal to Compel Arbitration of “Individual” PAGA Claims: Reyes v. Macy’s, Inc.
Published on 2012-01-20 13:44:00
On January 19, 2012, the First District (Division 3) published its opinion in Reyes v. Macy’s, Inc., __ Cal.App.4th __ (2012), which dismissed Macy’s appeal “from an order granting Macy’s motion to compel arbitration of plaintiff’s individual claims but denying the request to dismiss class allegations and plaintiff’s claim under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA)….” See Slip Opinion, at 1. As reasoned by the Court, the trial court's ruling on Macy's motio [..] > read more
Second District Creates Division in Authority on Whether Denial of Certification May Have Collateral Estoppel Effect: Bridgeford v. Pacific Health Corp.
Published on 2012-01-18 15:40:00
On January 18, 2012, the Second District (Division Three) issued an opinion “holding that the unnamed putative members of a class that was never certified cannot be bound by collateral estoppel.” See Bridgeford v. Pacific Health Corp., __ Cal.App.4th __ (2012). The Court’s opinion adopts the U.S. Supreme Court’s analysis in Smith v. Bayer Corporation, 131 S.Ct. 2368 (2011), which I discussed previously in a post found here. As the Bridgeford Court’s opinion acknowledges, the decision [..] > read more
California Supreme Court Rejects Finding That Insurance Claims Adjusters Are Non-Exempt As Matter of Law: Harris v. Superior Court
Published on 2012-01-02 12:46:00
On December 29, 2011, the California Supreme Court overturned a court of appeal opinion finding that insurance claims adjusters are categorically “non-exempt” employees in Harris v. Superior Court, __ Cal.4th __ (2011). The Supreme Court found that the court of appeal’s conclusion that work “not carried on at the level of policy or general operations” is not administrative, thereby falling outside of Wage Order 4’s administrative exemption as a matter of law, failed to consider the [..] > read more
Northern District Court Declines to Decertify Rule 23(b)(2) Restitutionary Class In Light of Dukes: In re Conseco Life Ins. Co.
Published on 2011-12-28 11:34:00
On December 20, 2011, Northern District Court Judge, Susan Illston, denied a request to decertify a nationwide Rule 23(b)(2) class based on the premise that the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Wal-Mart v. Dukes bars certification of claims seeking money damages under Rule 23(b)(2). See In re Conseco Life Ins. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146139 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 20, 2011). Defendant Conseco challenged certification of the plaintiffs’ lawsuit – which alleges that defendant increased monthly [..] > read more
Fourth District Upholds Trial Court's Refusal to Enforce Arbitration Provision, Post-Concepcion: Roberts v. El Cajon Motors, Inc.
Published on 2011-11-11 11:49:00
On November 8, 2011, the Fourth District (Division 1) upheld a trial court order denying a motion to compel individual arbitration of a class action case, post Concepcion, in Roberts v. El Cajon Motors, Inc., __ Cal.App.4th __ (2011). The Court upheld the trial court’s denial based on the finding that the defendant had waived any right to arbitration by actively engaging in litigation rather than promptly moving to compel:Assuming, without deciding, the waiver of classwide claims in the arbitr [..] > read more
Debriefing Brinker: A Few Surprises and 7 Minutes of Frustrating Silence
Published on 2011-11-08 18:36:00
I have spent the better part of the morning reviewing and digesting oral argument in Brinker. Initially, I had planned on attending the hearing in person, but cancelled my ticket yesterday after learning that the California Channel would be televising the event. Obviously, that was a mistake. However, notwithstanding the nearly seven minutes of dead air (due to problems with the feed), oral argument has left me with a few overarching impressions.First, it would seem to be universally apparent th [..] > read more
Second District Upholds Order Finding Arbitration Provision Unconscionable, Post-Concepcion: Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co.
Published on 2011-10-25 16:00:00
On October 24, 2011, the Second District (Division 1) upheld a trial court order denying a motion to compel arbitration of a class action case, post Concepcion, in Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co., __ Cal.App.4th __ (2011). Although the trial court had denied the defendant’s motion on the grounds that the class action waiver was unenforceable because it violated statutory rights under CLRA, the Court of Appeal did not affirm the trial court’s order on these grounds, finding instead that the a [..] > read more
Second District Overturns Cert Denial in Bait-and-Switch/Fraud Action Brought on Behalf of Residents of a Senior Citizen Mobilehome Park: Marler v. E.M. Johansing LLC
Published on 2011-10-20 09:39:00
On October 19, 2011, the Second District Court of Appeal (Division 6) reversed the denial of certification of contract and fraud claims arising out of an alleged scheme designed to secure consent from residents of a rent controlled senior citizen mobilehome park to convert the park to a condominium development. See Marler v. E.M. Johansing LLC, __ Cal.App.4th __ (2011). As stated in the Opinion, plaintiffs allege “that Park owners induced them to convert the Park to a condominium development t [..] > read more
Central District Finds PAGA Waiver Unconscionable, Post-Concepcion: Urbino v. Orkin Services of California
Published on 2011-10-07 10:43:00
On October 5, 2011, Central District Court Judge, Cormac J. Carney, denied a motion to compel arbitration of a PAGA claim brought by Orkin Services of California, Inc. and Rollins, Inc. (“Defendants”) on the grounds that the arbitration agreement contained an unconscionable PAGA arbitration waiver, rendering the agreement unenforceable under California law. See Urbino v. Orkin Servs. of Cal., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114746 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 5, 2011). As reasoned by the Court, the U.S. Supreme C [..] > read more
California Supreme Court Holds California Overtime Provisions Apply to Colorado / Arizona Residents Working in California, But that the UCL Does Not Permit Enforcement of FLSA Overtime Claims For Work Performed By Nonresidents In Other States: Sull
Published on 2011-07-01 15:27:00
On June 30, 2011, the California Supreme Court issued an opinion in Sullivan v. Oracle Corp., __ Cal. 4th __ (2011) resolving the set of questions pertaining to the scope of California’s Overtime and UCL provisions certified by the Ninth Circuit in > read more
Central District Certifies Paystub Claim Against FedEx: McKenzie v. Fed. Express Corp.
Published on 2011-07-01 11:29:00
On June 16, 2011, Central District court Judge Gary Allen Feess ordered certification of a Labor Code section 226(e) paystub claim against FedEx in McKenzie v. Fed. Express Corp., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65278 (C.D. Cal. June 16, 2011). Plaintiff's&nbs > read more
U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes et al Unlikely To Significantly Impact Rule 23(b)(3) Certification
Published on 2011-06-21 11:50:00
On June 20, 2011, the U.S Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit’s certification decision in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes et al, 564 U. S. ____ (2011), concluding that the Ninth Circuit applied improper criteria with regard to Rule 23(b)(2) (wh > read more
U.S. Supreme Court Severely Limits Preclusive Effect Afforded To Denials of Class Certification: Smith v. Bayer Corp.
Published on 2011-06-17 16:04:00
On June 16, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an important class action decision in Smith v. Bayer Corp., 564 U. S. ____ (2011) (2011 U.S. LEXIS 4559) relating to the preclusive effect which may be given to a Federal court order denying class certi > read more
Northern District Certifies False Advertisement Class Based on Walnut Manufacturer Health Claims: Zeisel v. Diamond Foods, Inc.
Published on 2011-06-10 14:14:00
On June 7, 2011, Northern District Judge Jeffrey S. White certified a nationwide UCL/CLRA class based on allegations that the defendant engaged in promotional activities that “‘used express and implied statements about the positive effects of ome > read more
Second District Publishes Two New Beverly-Song “Zip Code” Opinions: Archer v. United Rentals and Folgelstrom v. Lamps Plus
Published on 2011-05-23 10:47:00
On May 19, 2011, the Second District (Division 1) in Archer v. United Rentals, __ Cal.App.4th __ (2011) considered several questions left unanswered in Pineda v. Williams-Sonoma Stores, Inc., 51 Cal.4th 524 (2011), previously discussed here, inc > read more
California Supreme Court Grants Review in Tien v. Tenet Healthcare
Published on 2011-05-19 09:38:00
On May 18, 2011, the California Supreme Court granted review of the Second District (Division 8) opinion upholding denial of certification of meal break claims in Tien v. Tenet Healthcare, 192 Cal. App. 4th 1055 (2011). This comes on the heels of the > read more
Excused Absence: My Most Recent Court Appearance
Published on 2011-05-19 08:55:00
Pictured: Myself and “opposing counsel” in the Mural Room at the Santa Barbara Courthouse. > read more
UPDATE: AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion
Published on 2011-05-02 10:05:00
I received an email this weekend from a reader questioning whether the Marks test could be considered here based on the fact that Justice Thomas did not technically “concur in judgment.” I appreciate criticism like this, as I write my blog in lar > read more
AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion: Whose Analysis Controls, if Any? Some Grist For The Mill:
Published on 2011-04-29 18:38:00
So, having given myself a full day to absorb the Court’s opinion, the most striking (and perplexing) point in my mind is that the Court does not expressly order the class allegations stricken, or even order the case to arbitration. Rather, the Cour > read more
My Initial Thoughts on the Supreme Court’s Decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion
Published on 2011-04-29 08:13:00
On April 27, 2011, the U.S Supreme Court ruled the “Discover Bank rule” was preempted by the FAA in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 US. __ (2011). After finishing my first read of the decision, I recalled something my father us > read more
Northern District Certifies Meal Period Class on Behalf of Refinery Plant Operators: Gardner v. Shell Oil Co.
Published on 2011-04-28 11:22:00
On April 21, 2011, Northern District Judge Claudia Wilken granted certification of meal period claims on behalf of shift workers employed at the Shell Oil refinery located in Martinez, California. See Gardner v. Shell Oil Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LE > read more
Fourth District Holds Court Erred in Ordering Replacement-Rep Discovery in “Headless” Class Action Case: Starbucks Corp. v. Super. Ct.
Published on 2011-04-26 13:38:00
On April 26, 2011, the Fourth District (Division 3) issued a second appellate opinion in an action alleging Starbucks violated Labor Code sections 432.7 and 432.8 by using a preprinted job application inquiring into applicant’s prior drug marijuana > read more
Southern District Rejects Proposition that Oral Statement Based Claims Are Uncertifiable: Thomasson v. GC Servs., Ltd. P’ship
Published on 2011-04-19 09:43:00
On February 4, 2011, Southern District Judge, John A. Houston, entered an order certifying Fair Debt Collection Practices Act claims in Thomasson v. GC Servs., Ltd. P'ship, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40445 (S.D. Cal. Feb. 4, 2011) based on a debt collecto > read more
First District Affirms Rule Limiting Employer Discretion to Define “Workweek” to Avoid Payment of Overtime Compensation: Seymore v. Metson Marine
Published on 2011-04-18 11:35:00
On April 14, 2011, the First District (Division Three) reversed an order granting an employer summary judgment on employee “seventh day premium pay” overtime claims in Seymore v. Metson Marine, __ Cal.App.4th __ (2011). According to the Cou > read more
Second District Affirms Mandatory Use of Opt-Out Class in Case Implicating Class Member Medical Privacy Interests: L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center v. Super Ct.
Published on 2011-04-14 10:16:00
On April 13, 2011, the Second District (Division One), issued an opinion in L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center v. Super Ct., __ Cal. 4th __ (2011), upholding the trial court’s refusal to permit use of an “opt-in” certification notice to ensure prote > read more
Northern District Certifies TILA/UCL Class Action Against Chase: Hofstetter v. Chase Home Fin., LLC
Published on 2011-04-12 11:10:00
On March 31, 2011, Northern District Judge, William Alsup, certified a TILA/UCL class action against Chase “involving lender-imposed flood-insurance requirements for property securing home-equity lines of credit.” See Hofstetter v. Chase Ho > read more
Northern District Certifies Product Defect/False Ad Action Against Acer America Corporation: Wolph v. Acer Am. Corp.
Published on 2011-04-04 11:08:00
On March 25, 2011, Northern District Court Judge Jeffrey S. White granted plaintiff’s motion to certify a nationwide product defect/false advertising action against defendant Acer America Corporation in Wolph v. Acer Am. Corp., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXI > read more
First District Contemplates Impact of Pleading a Case as a Class Action On Bilateral Fee Shifting: Turner v. Ass'n of Am. Med. Colleges
Published on 2011-03-25 10:14:00
Can pleading a case as a class action impair a defendant's ability to recover fees under a bilateral fee shifting statute? According to the First District (Division Five), it may. On March 24, 2011, the Court issued an opinion in Turner v. Ass'n of > read more
California Supreme Court’s Decision in Kwikset Turns the Tide On UCL Standing Challenges:
Published on 2011-03-18 08:22:00
In less than two months since publication, the California Supreme Court’s decision in Kwikset Corp. v. Superior Court, 51 Cal. 4th 310 (2011), previously discussed here, appears to have curtailed the success of defense efforts to dispose of UCL cla > read more
California Supreme Court Concludes Death Knell Doctrine Limited to Orders Terminating Class’ Claims Where Individual Claims Persist: In re Baycol Cases I and II
Published on 2011-03-01 09:50:00
On February 28, 2011, the California Supreme Court concluded that a court of appeal erred by applying the “death knell doctrine” to dismiss the class component of an appeal that was taken subsequent to judgment, rather than the order sustaining a > read more
Second District Narrows Applicability of Labor Code Section 218.5 Fee Shifting Provision: United Parcel Service Wage and Hour Cases
Published on 2011-02-28 09:53:00
On February 24, 2011, the Second District (Division 8) concluded that the bi-lateral fee shifting provision of Section 218.5 did not apply to various wage related causes of action, including meal and rest period claims. See United Parcel Service Wage > read more
California Supreme Court Concludes an Employee’s Statutory Right to a Berman Hearing Is Unwaivable: Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno
Published on 2011-02-24 12:24:00
On February 24, 2011, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno, __ Cal.4th __ (2011), concluding that an employee’s statutory right to a Berman Hearing before the Labor Comissioner may not be waived > read more
Fourth District Holds That Affirmance of Order Denying Certification on Appeal Bars Subsequent Efforts to Certify Class: Safaie v. Jacuzzi Whirlpool Bath, Inc.
Published on 2011-02-24 10:16:00
On February 22, 2011, the Fourth District (Division One) published its opinion in Safaie v. Jacuzzi Whirlpool Bath, Inc., __ Cal. App. 4th __(2011), holding that a trial court’s order denying certification, once affirmed on appeal, bars subsequent > read more
Second District (Division 8) Issues Two New Opinions Involving Meal and Rest Periods: UPS v. Super. Ct. & Tien v. Tenet Healthcare
Published on 2011-02-17 14:21:00
On February 16, 2011, the Second District Court of Appeal, Division 8, issued two new opinions involving meal and rest period claims. The first, UPS v. Super. Ct., __ Cal. App. 4th __ (2011), considered whether Labor Code Section 226.7 “authorizes > read more
California Supreme Court Holds that Requesting and Recording A Consumer Zip Code During Credit Card Transactions Violates Song-Beverly Credit Card Act: Pineda v. Williams-Sonoma Stores, Inc.
Published on 2011-02-10 12:42:00
On February 10, 2011, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Pineda v. Williams-Sonoma Stores, Inc., __ Cal.4th__ (2011), holding that a retailer’s practice of requesting and recording a consumer’s zip code during a credit card transa > read more
More on the California Supreme Court’s Decision in Kwikset Corp. et al. v. Superior Court
Published on 2011-01-31 18:55:00
Having had some time to digest the Court’s opinion (located here), it is evident that Prop 64 “injury in fact” standing requirement may be satisfied simply by allegations that the named plaintiff purchased a product as the direct result of > read more
California Supreme Court Holds that Reliance on Alleged Deceptive Promotional Statements May Alone Satisfy UCL Standing: Kwikset Corp. et al. v. Superior Court
Published on 2011-01-27 19:13:00
On January 27, 2011, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Kwikset Corp. et al. v. Superior Court, __ Cal.4th __ (2011), reversing the Fourth District’s determination that UCL standing under the fraud prong was contingent on allegation > read more
Ninth Circuit Rules CAFA “Local Controversy” Exception Elements to Be Established Based on Allegations in Complaint: Coleman v. Estes Express Lines
Published on 2011-01-27 09:49:00
On January 25, 2011, the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion in Coleman v. Estes Express Lines, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 1538, concluding that a district court is limited to the complaint in deciding whether two of the criteria for CAFA’s “local controve > read more
California Supreme Court to Issue Opinion in Kwikset Corp. et al. v. Superior Court:
Published on 2011-01-26 18:19:00
The California Supreme Court has issued a Notice that it will be issuing its opinion in Kwikset Corp. et al. v. Superior Court tomorrow. The issue in Kwikset is as follows: Does a plaintiff’s allegation that he purchased a product in reliance > read more
California Supreme Court Issues “Grant and Hold” in Hernandez v. Chipotle Mexican Grill Pending its Decision in Brinker:
Published on 2011-01-26 17:16:00
On January 26, 2011, the California Supreme Court granted review of the Second District’s decision in Hernandez v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, 189 Cal. App. 4th 751 (2010), pending the Court decision in Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court. > read more
Southern District Certifies Rule 23 and FLSA “Off-the-Clock” Classes Based on Store Closing “Lockdown” Policy: Stiller v. Costco
Published on 2011-01-26 09:15:00
On December 13, 2010, Southern District Court Judge, Marilyn L. Huff, certified a nationwide FLSA collective action and a California Rule 23 action arising from an alleged policy maintained by Costco which required closing shit hourly employees to re > read more
First District Holds No Conflict of Interest Created By Counsel’s Concurrent Representation of Settlement Objector and Overlapping Class Action: Kullar v. FootLocker
Published on 2011-01-19 10:21:00
On January 18, 2011, the First District (Division 3) upheld a trial court order declining to disqualify counsel representing the plaintiff in an apparent tag-along class action based on counsel’s simultaneous representation of that individual in he > read more
8th Circuit’s Disapproval of Tobacco II Deemed Unpersuasive by a Second California District Court: Chavez v. Blue Sky Natural Bev. Co.
Published on 2011-01-07 10:20:00
On November 22, 2010, a second Northern District Court declined a request to follow the 8th Circuit’s recent decision in Avritt v. Reliastar Life Ins. Co., 615 F.3d 1023 (8th Cir. 2010) as a basis for decertification of a UCL deceptive advertising > read more
Second District Again Holds That Wage Order 7's “Suitable Seating” Provision is a Mandatory Labor Requirement Subjecting Employers to PAGA Penalties: Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. v. Superior Court
Published on 2010-12-23 10:03:00
On December 22, 2010, the Second District, Division 4, joined its sister division’s conclusion in Bright v. 99¢ Only Stores, 189 Cal. App. 4th 1472 (2010) that Wage Order 7’s "suitable seating" requirement (8 CCR 11070(14)) imposes a mandatory l > read more
Northern District Holds CAFA Not Implicated in PAGA Representative Action: Sample v. Big Lots Stores, Inc.
Published on 2010-12-15 10:48:00
On November 29, 2010, Northern District Court judge, Saundra Brown Armstrong, granted plaintiff’s motion to remand a PAGA action (predicated on alleged overtime, meal and rest period violations) on the grounds that a PAGA representative action does > read more