Posts Tagged ‘Lawsuit’
California, California Labor Code, Class action, Employment, Lawsuit, Litigation, Minimum Wage, Overtime
In Arbitration, Waiver on February 17, 2012 at 6:34 am
Image via Wikipedia
In an unpublished decision, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s denial of a motion to compel arbitration in a wage and hour class action, where defendants conducted voluminous discovery and filed and fully litigating two motions to compel further responses to discovery, a motion for sanctions and a motion for a protective order. Partridge, et al. v. Hott Wings, Inc., et al., No. A130266, 2012 WL 470458 (Feb. 14, 2012).
Discussion
The Court found that Defendants’ delay in filing their petition to compel arbitration “connotes an intent not to arbitrate”. Id. Defendants conducted substantial discovery:
Between March 2010 and the October 2010 hearing on defendants’ motion to compel arbitration, defendants engaged in voluminous written discovery to which plaintiffs responded. In addition, defendants deposed numerous plaintiffs and third party witnesses. Although plaintiffs had begun deposing witnesses, they had not yet obtained basic documents from defendants through discovery. The discovery focused on the liability of individual defendants and the franchise defendants that employ plaintiffs. As a result of defendants’ discovery requests, plaintiffs provided information regarding plaintiffs’ estimated damages, which defendants were responsible for which violations, and the liability of the individual as well as the franchise defendants. A reasonable inference is that the information gained from defendants’ discovery goes to significant issues in plaintiffs’ case.
Id.
In addition, the Court found that Defendants “substantially invoked the litigation machinery” by: Read the rest of this entry »
Anthony C. White, California, Fair Labor Standards Act, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Law, Lawsuit, Maria-Elena James, United States, United States District Court for the Northern District of California
In Class Actions, Class Discovery, Class Notice, Collective Action, Discovery, FLSA, Opt-in on October 28, 2010 at 9:37 am
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California denied the production of names, addresses and telephone numbers of non-opt-in members of a FLSA collective and putative Labor Code class action. Hill v. R+L Carriers Shared Services, LLC, No. C 09-1907 CW (MEJ), 2010 WL 4175958 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 20, 2010). Plaintiff Glenn Hill is a former employee of Defendant R+L Carriers Shared Services, LLC, which provides administrative employees to transportation companies all across the United States. Id. *1. Plaintiff worked as a “dispatcher” at Defendant’s San Lorenzo terminal in California, and brought a collective and class action pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), California’s wage-and-hour laws and California Business & Professions Code section 17200. Id.
Background
Plaintiff sought two sub-classes: those employees in California and those that he refers to as a Nationwide Collective. Id. The California Class is defined as “all persons who worked for any period of time in California who were classified as Dispatchers (including “City Dispatchers” and any other position(s) who are either called, or work(ed) as, dispatchers) in the four years prior to the filing of this Complaint, up through the final disposition of this action.” Id. In Defendant contended that a collective action under the FLSA is improper because the job duties, work schedules, and salary of its employees varies across the United States, as well as in the State of California. Id. Read the rest of this entry »
California, Charles R. Breyer, Class Notice, Consuelo B. Marshall, Law, Lawsuit, Legal Information, Los Angeles, New York Times, Ninth Circuit, Stephen S. Trott, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, William A. Fletcher
In 23(b)(2) Class, Class Actions, Class Notice, Collective Action, Exemptions, FLSA, Jury, Meal and Rest Breaks, Opt-in, Opt-out, Overtime, Preemption, Professional, Trial, Unfair Competition Law on September 30, 2010 at 12:14 am
On Monday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed in “all respects” the trial court’s grant of partial summary judgment to plaintiffs, a judgment after jury and bench trials, and an award of attorney’s fees to plaintiffs. Wang v. Chinese Daily News, Inc., Nos. 08-55483, 08-56740, — F.3d —-, 2010 WL 3733568 (9th Cir. Sept. 27, 2010). Among other things, the Ninth Circuit held that plaintiff newspaper reporters were non-exempt. (Thank you to Randy Renick for bringing this case to my attention.)
Background
Employees of Chinese Daily News, Inc. (“CDN”), a Chinese-language newspaper, filed suit against CDN on behalf of current, former, and future CDN employees based in CDN’s San Francisco and Monterey Park (Los Angeles), California locations. Id. *1. Plaintiffs claimed violations of the FLSA, California’s Labor Code, and California’s Unfair Competition Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200, alleging that employees were made to work in excess of eight hours per day and forty hours per week. Id. Read the rest of this entry »
California, California Supreme Court, Class action, Economic development, Hotel, Hyatt, Law, Lawsuit, Legal Information, Privacy, Radhika Sainath, Randy Renick, Real estate, Swimming pool, United States, Victor B. Kenton
In Class Discovery, Discovery, Opt-out on September 21, 2010 at 6:42 pm
The Central District granted plaintiff’s motion to compel disclosure of the name and contact information (full name, last known addresses and telephone numbers) for class members of a putative class action for unpaid commission wages. Celia Alvarez, et al. v. The Hyatt Regency Long Beach, et al., CV 09-04791-GAF (VBKx). According to the court, the class was defined as all non-exempt employees for the period commencing May 7, 2005. (Thank you to Radhika Sainath for alerting me to the decision.)
Defendants contended that the information was not relevant for class certification and invaded the privacy rights of the putative class. Plaintiffs offered to enter into a protective order and offer that the information be given to a third party who would send the class members an opt-out letter. Defendant rejected these proposal. Read the rest of this entry »
Arthur G. Scotland, Government, Labor Code, Lawsuit, Prevailing wage, Rick Sims, Sacramento, SCOTLAND, Subcontractor, United States, Vance W. Raye
In Affirmative Defenses, Unclean Hands on September 12, 2010 at 1:14 pm
Plaintiff construction subcontractor appealed from a trial court ruling that its suit against the construction contractor was barred by the doctrine of unclean hands. B & K Custom Cabinets, Inc. v. B.K. Ball, Inc., No. C060766, 2010 WL 3508321 (Cal. Ct. App. 3d Dist. Sept. 9, 2010). The subcontractor B & K sued contractor Ball seeking to enforce a stop notice and asserting causes of action for breach of contract and violation of the prompt payment laws, all designed to recover $155,534 allegedly due under the subcontract. Id. *6. Ball claimed it owed no more than $87,987, but because it had knowledge of B & K’s prevailing wage violation, Ball could not pay even that amount without exposing itself to liability under Labor Code section 1775 unless B & K provided “an affidavit signed under penalty of perjury” attesting that B & K employees had been paid the prevailing wages.” Id. (citing Lab. Code § 1775(b)). Read the rest of this entry »
California, Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, Fair Labor Standards Act, Law, Lawrence K. Karlton, Lawsuit, Legal Information, Subject-matter jurisdiction, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, University of Phoenix
In CAFA Jurisdiction, Certification, Class Actions on September 6, 2010 at 2:07 am
The court in Adoma v. University of Phoenix, Inc., No. CIV. S-10-0059 LKK/GGH, 2010 WL 3431804 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 31, 2010 (slip op.) held that even where plaintiff’s proposed method of “reconstructing records of hours worked . . . will be imperfect”, plaintiffs may rely on “a few representative inquiries whose results will be extrapolated to the class.” Read the rest of this entry »
Arbitration, Attorney's fee, Cause of action, Civil procedure, Judicial review, Law, Lawsuit, Supreme Court, Supreme Court of the United States, United States Supreme Court
In Arbitration, Attorney's Fees on September 4, 2010 at 6:32 am
The Third District in Miller v. Lifestyles Senior Housing Managers et al., No. C059843, 2010 WL 3398750 (Cal. Ct. App. 3d Dist. Aug. 31, 2010), affirmed the trial court’s judgment confirming an arbitrator’s decision denying statutorily mandated attorneys fees to the prevailing plaintiff. Id. *1. Read the rest of this entry »
City Attorney, Drinking water, Employment, Lawsuit, Los Angeles, Manufacturing, Overtime, United States
In Breaking News on September 3, 2010 at 5:00 am
Richard Winton of the Los Angeles Times reports that a South Los Angeles garment factory has agreed to pay backpay and overtime to settle a suit filed by the City Attorney’s office in 2009.
The settlement will bring long overdue compensation for unpaid overtime to employees and will require an independent monitor at the factory to oversee compliance with workplace laws, city attorneys said.
The owners agreed to pay for an independent monitor, the first time a domestic garment manufacturer has consented to do so, said Asst. City Atty Jim Colbert.
The lawsuit filed in July 2009 alleged that Seventeen Inc. and its predecessor, Q&I Inc., along with their owners and operators, required employees to work 12-hour shifts, sometimes two or three shifts back-to-back, six days a week without overtime pay or rest breaks. Read the rest of this entry »
Business, Government, Illegal immigration, Immigration, Law, Lawsuit, Overtime, Terra Universal, United States
In Breaking News on September 1, 2010 at 6:22 am
Business Week reports that civil rights lawyers filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday against Terra Universal Inc., a government contractor that was the target of an immigration raid this summer, accusing the company of bilking illegal workers out of pay and violating their rights. The civil suit alleges that Terra Universal and its owner denied illegal immigrant workers overtime and sick pay and discriminated against them because of their visa status. Read the rest of this entry »
1964 Civil Rights Act, California, Discrimination, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Lawsuit, Maria-Elena James, Plaintiff, Title VII, United States
In Demurrer, Overtime, Title VII on August 26, 2010 at 7:45 am
The Northern District of California considered whether an allegation of failure to allow overtime because of a plaintiff’s race or sex states a claim for discrimination under Title VII. The court held that it did.
In Moore v. Contra Costa College District, No. C 09-4781 MEJ, 2010 WL 3324895 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 23, 2010) (slip op.), Plaintiff filed an employment discrimination complaint as a pro se litigant, bringing suit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, specifically 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5. Read the rest of this entry »
