Class Actions

Subscribe to Class Actions via RSS

An employment arbitration agreement that incorporated the American Arbitration Association’s National Rules for the Resolution of Employment Disputes vested the arbitrator with the power to decide whether the agreement authorized class-wide relief, the California Court of Appeal has ruled. Universal Protection Service LP v. Superior Court, No. C078557 (Cal. Ct. App. Aug. 18, 2015). The Court denied an employer’s petition to set aside the trial court’s order compelling class arbitration and ordered that the arbitrator should determine the class issue.
Continue Reading California Court Holds Arbitrator Decides Class Arbitrability Where Agreement Specifies AAA Rules

A California federal judge dismissed a putative employment collective action last week, brought by individuals who wrote reviews on Yelp, a popular online business rating website predicated on user-reviews, holding that an individual who acts for personal pleasure without a promise of pay does not have a claim for wages under federal labor law. Jeung, et al., v. Yelp, Inc., Case No. 15-cv-02228-RS, U.S.Dist. (N.D. Cal. 2015).
Continue Reading Common Sense Prevails as Court Knocks Out Yelp Reviewers’ Class Action Seeking Pay for Voluntary Online Reviews

An arbitration clause in a consumer agreement was enforceable, including the class action waiver, despite four supposedly one-sided arbitration provisions in the agreement, the California Supreme Court has held. Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co., LLC, No. S199119 (Aug. 3, 2015). The much-anticipated decision has significant implications for arbitration agreements between employers and employees.
Continue Reading California Supreme Court: Federal Arbitration Act Preempts Plaintiff’s State Rights

In the uncertain world of the California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”), employers enjoyed a significant victory in Williams v. Superior Court (Marshalls) (Ct. App. 2d Dist. May 15, 2015), Case No. B259967. In Williams, the California Court of Appeal upheld a lower court order limiting a plaintiff’s request for the names and contact information of other non-exempt employees to those employees in the plaintiff’s work location until after he had “been deposed ‘for at least six productive hours’” regarding the facts supporting his statewide allegations. Williams is a significant limitation on a plaintiff’s ability to impose burdensome discovery obligations on an employer before the plaintiff makes a factual showing that “some reason exists to suspect [the employer’s] local practices extend statewide.”
Continue Reading PAGA: Trial Court May Limit Scope Of Discovery To Plaintiff’s “Local Claims” Before Plaintiff Makes Showing Of Statewide Practices

The legal pot is really boiling these days when it comes to civil penalty claims under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act. Many, if not most, California class action complaints contain PAGA claims, and plaintiffs increasingly are filing so-called “pure PAGA actions” that purport to seek only civil penalties under PAGA and not wages, premiums or statutory penalties that typically are sought in class actions. Some plaintiffs reason that if they can first get a judgment for PAGA penalties, they can then invoke “collateral estoppel” to collect other remedies in a second action. This is quite an evolution from the conventional wisdom that a PAGA cause of action in a class action complaint is simply a fail-safe in the event the court refuses to certify a class.
Continue Reading PAGA’S Many Unanswered Questions

On October 28, 2014, a California Court of Appeal held that the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (“FAAAA”) does not preempt California’s meal and rest break requirements as applied to motor carriers.  [Godfrey v. Oakland Port Services Corp. (Cal. App. Ct. Oct. 28, 2014) Case No. A139274.]

In Godfrey, the plaintiffs…

No employer welcomes the news that it’s just been served with a wage and hour class action. Many employers naturally desire to communicate with their employees to provide their perspective and to explain why employees may not want to participate in the class action. Before launching such employee communications, however, companies should always consult with…

Calling “seriously flawed” a lower court’s trial management plan which used sampling evidence to prove class liability and damages under California law, the California Supreme Court has vacated a $15-million judgment against the employer for overtime pay and remanded the case for a new trial on both liability and damages. Duran v. U.S. Bank National …

With increasing frequency, California courts (especially federal district courts) are enforcing binding arbitration agreements between employers and employees.  In Richards v. Ernst & Young, No. 11-17530 (9th Cir. Aug. 21, 2013), the Ninth Circuit recently reversed a denial of the employer’s motion to compel arbitration of the employee’s wage and hour claims.  In so…