Co-Authored by Brandon McKelvey and Sophia Kwan
Yesterday, Federal District Court Judge John A. Kronstadt (Central District of California) denied certification to a proposed class of over 5,000 grocery employees at all WinCo Foods warehouse grocery stores in California. In Hughes v. WinCo Foods, plaintiffs sought to certify a class of all hourly employees at WinCo stores in California
Authored by Laura Reathaford
A California federal district court judge has refused to certify a putative class of Verizon FiOS technicians who claimed they were misclassified as exempt from California’s overtime requirements.
Plaintiffs sought certification under Rule 23(b)(3) on the basis that Verizon had a common policy of misclassifying its First Level Managers (“FLMs”). However, the Court rejected this
Co-authored by Brandon McKelvey and Fred Sanderson
Citing the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Dukes v. Wal-Mart, on December 30, 2011, the Ninth Circuit vacated its prior decision reversing a district court’s denial of class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2). The Ninth Circuit’s unpublished memorandum in Sepulveda v. Wal-Mart Store, Inc., indicates that the Supreme
Continue Reading Ninth Circuit Changes Course On Class Certification Ruling In Light Of Dukes
Co-authored by Fred Sanderson, Brandon McKelvey, and Ferry Lopez
Judge Breyer of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California refused to certify a proposed class of assistant managers at WinCo Food’s discount warehouse grocery stores in California. In Gales v. WinCo Foods, No. C 09-05813 CRB, 2011 WL 3794887 (N.D. Cal 2011), a former
Authored by Robert Whitman
“Hybrids” are not just popular with Prius owners. Plaintiffs’ wage-and-hour lawyers frequently bring collective and class action lawsuits that assert violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage laws in the same case based on the same basic set of facts – so-called “hybrid” actions. While the tactic has been prevalent for years, its
Continue Reading Want to Buy a Hybrid? The Second Circuit is Now Open for Business
Authored by Abad Lopez
Because the two mechanisms are ‘incompatible,’ a proposed class of assistant bank managers cannot pursue an opt-out Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 class action and an opt-in Fair Labor Standards Act collective action in the same lawsuit, a federal district court has held. A common strategy employed by Plaintiff’s counsel is to bring both 
FLSA and analogous state wage claims
Continue Reading In Hybrid Class/Collective Actions, Plaintiffs Can’t Have It Both Ways
Co-authored by Richard Alfred, Lorie Almon, Andrew Paley, Noah Finkel and Brett Bartlett
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. This opinion will transform Rule 23 law and dramatically change how workplace class actions are structured and defended and, in doing so, will also assist employers in defeating
Co-authored by Ariel Cudkowicz and Jessica Schauer
On Friday, March 18, 2011, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts adopted a pair of reports by a federal Magistrate finding that Starbucks violated Massachusetts law by allowing “shift supervisors” to share in the proceeds of tip jars and recommending certification of a class of Massachusetts baristas affected by the
Continue Reading Bay State Baristas Don’t Have to Share Tips with Shift Supervisors
Authored by Brigitte Duffy
Over the last decade, the Massachusetts food service industry has experienced a pervasive steam of litigation challenging tip pooling practices. At its root is the Massachusetts Tip Statute, which strictly regulates who may participate in pooled tips and defines what is a “tip” subject to its regulation. The statute defines a tip as a “sum
Co-authored by Richard Alfred and Rebecca Bromet
The Seventh Circuit ruled yesterday in Ervin v. OS Restaurant Services, Inc., Case No. 09-3029 (Jan. 18, 2011), that “there is no categorical rule against certifying a Rule 23(b)(3) state-law class action in a proceeding that also includes a collective action brought under the FLSA. In reaching this decision the Court