California Employment Cases

Current Employment Cases

Activision Blizzard Case - Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CURRENT

John Lee v. Activision Blizzard, Inc. & Blizzard Entertainment, Inc.
Los Angeles County Superior Court
Case No. BC575665

This is a putative California class action against Activision Blizzard, Inc. and Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. on behalf of current and former salaried Senior Artists (technical production team members) seeking overtime compensation.  The action seeks to recover earned and unpaid overtime compensation based on the allegation that Activision has misclassified its technical production team as exempt when they should be classified as nonexempt and paid overtime compensation.

Please view the documents below for further information about this case:
First Amended Complaint
Activision Article

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact J.E.B. Pickett.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact J.E.B. Pickett.

Bank of America Business Banker Case – Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CURRENT

Lopez v. Bank of America
US District Court, Northern District of California
Case No.17-cv-02383-VC

This is a putative California class action against Bank of America (“BOFA”) on behalf of current and former salaried Business Bankers (“BB”) seeking, among other things, overtime compensation and reimbursement of unpaid business expenses.  The action seeks to recover earned and unpaid overtime compensation based on the allegation that BOFA has misclassified its BBs as exempt when they should be classified as nonexempt and paid overtime compensation.  Additionally, this action seeks to recover unpaid business expenses based on the allegation that BOFA maintained company-wide polices that required BBs to pay ordinary business expenses without reimbursement.

Please view the documents below for further information about this case:
Complaint

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact Ed Wynne.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact Ed Wynne.

Bank of America Loan Officer Case – Wage & Hour Class Action

Wage & Hour Class Action

Case Status: CURRENT

McLeod v. Bank of America, N.A.
US District Court, Northern District of California
Case No.16-cv-03294-EMC

This is a putative class action against Bank of America on behalf of all current and former Mortgage Loan Officers who were not reimbursed for all of their business related expenses and who were subject to unlawful deductions from their compensation.

Please view the documents below for further information about this case:
First Amended Complaint

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact Ed Wynne.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact Ed Wynne.

Chase Assistant Branch Manager Case - Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CURRENT

Mitra Erami v. JPMorgan Chase Bank
US District Court, Central District of California
Case No. CV-15-07728-PSG

This is a putative California class action against JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (“Chase”) on behalf of current and former salaried Assistant Branch Managers (ABM) seeking overtime compensation.  The action seeks to recover earned and unpaid overtime compensation based on the allegation that Chase has misclassified its ABMs as exempt when they should be classified as nonexempt and paid overtime compensation.

Please view the documents below for further information about this case:
Second Amended Complaint
April 2015 Newsletter
July 2015 Newsletter
November 2015 Newsletter

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact Ed Wynne.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact Ed Wynne.

Chase Business Relationship Manager Case - Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CURRENT

Hesami v. JPMorgan Chase Bank
US District Court, Central District of California
Case No. 17-cv-1418-FMO

This is a putative California class action against JPMorgan Chase (“Chase”) on behalf of current and former salaried Business Relationship Managers (“BRM”) seeking, among other things, overtime compensation and reimbursement of unpaid business expenses. The action seeks to recover earned and unpaid overtime compensation based on the allegation that Chase has misclassified its BRMs as exempt when they should be classified as nonexempt and paid overtime compensation. Additionally, this action seeks to recover unpaid business expenses based on the allegation that Chase maintained company-wide polices that required BRMs to pay ordinary business expenses without reimbursement.

Please view the documents below for further information about this case:
First Amended Complaint

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact Ed Wynne.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact Ed Wynne.

Community Bank Business Relationship Manager Case - Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CURRENT

Hesami v. Community Bank
Los Angeles County Superior Court
Case No. BC 640235

This is a putative California class action against Community Bank (“Community”) on behalf of current and former salaried Business Relationship Managers (“BRM”) seeking, among other things, overtime compensation and reimbursement of unpaid business expenses. The action seeks to recover earned and unpaid overtime compensation based on the allegation that Community has misclassified its BRMs as exempt when they should be classified as nonexempt and paid overtime compensation. Additionally, this action seeks to recover unpaid business expenses based on the allegation that Community maintained company-wide polices that required BRMs to pay ordinary business expenses without reimbursement.

Please view the documents below for further information about this case:
First Amended Complaint

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact Ed Wynne.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact Ed Wynne.

Dawn Food Products Case - Wage & Hour Class Action

Wage & Hour Class Action

Case Status: CURRENT

Castro v. Dawn Food Products, Inc.
Alameda County Superior Court
Case No. RG17857155

This is a putative California class action against Dawn Food Products, Inc. (“Dawn Food”) on behalf of current and former Drivers and Local Drivers seeking, among other things, overtime compensation and compensation for missed meal and rest breaks. The action seeks to recover earned and unpaid overtime compensation based on the allegation that Dawn Food has failed to pay double-time compensation for all hours worked in excess of twelve hours per day. Additionally, this action seeks to recover compensation for missed and denied meal and rest breaks.

Please view the documents below for further information about this case:
Complaint

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact J.E.B. Pickett.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact J.E.B. Pickett.

Dollar General Case - Wage & Hour Class Action

Wage & Hour Class Action

Case Status: CURRENT

Farley, et al. v. Dolgen California, LLC
US District Court, Eastern District of California
Case No. 16-cv-02501-KJM

This is a putative California class action against Dolgen, California, doing business as Dollar General (“Dollar”) on behalf of current and former non-exempt workers that provided key carrier responsibilities and were denied meal or rest breaks (“Key Carrier”). The action seeks, among other things, to recover compensation for missed meal and rest breaks based on the allegation that Dollar had a corporate policy which prevented Key Carriers from being relieved of all duties during the required meal and rest breaks due to the fact that there was only one Key Carrier on duty and had to be available at all times.

Please view the documents below for further information about this case:
First Amended Complaint

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact J.E.B. Pickett.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact J.E.B. Pickett.

Patelco Branch Manager Case-Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Elizabeth Briones, et al. v. Patelco Credit Union
Alameda County Superior Court
Case No. RG16805680

This is a putative class action against Patelco Credit Union (Patelco) on behalf of current and former salaried Branch Managers, Branch Managers in Training and Group Managers (BMs) in California at any time from February 29, 2012 to the present. The case was filed in the Alameda County Superior Court, California. The action seeks to recover earned and unpaid overtime compensation based on the allegation that Patelco has misclassified its BM’s as exempt when they should be classified as nonexempt and paid overtime compensation.

Please view the documents below for further information about this case:
First Amended Complaint

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact Ed Wynne or J.E.B. Pickett.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact Ed Wynne or J.E.B. Pickett.

UBS Financial Services Case – Wage & Hour Class Action

Wage & Hour Class Action

Case Status: CURRENT

Sahu v. UBS Financial Service, Inc.
Alameda County Superior Court
Case No. RG16837082

This is a putative California class action against UBS Financial Services, Inc. (“UBS”) on behalf of current and former Financial Advisors (“FA”) seeking, among other things, reimbursement of unpaid business expenses and unlawful deductions.  The action seeks to recover unpaid business expenses based on the allegation that UBS maintained company-wide policies that required FAs to pay ordinary business expenses without reimbursement.

Please view the documents below for further information about this case:
First Amended Complaint

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact Ed Wynne.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact Ed Wynne.

US Bank BBO Litigation #1-Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CURRENT

Duran, et al. v. US Bank, N.A.
Alameda County Superior Court
Case No. 2001-035537
Supreme Court
Case No. S200923

On May 16, 2012, the California Supreme Court voted unanimously to grant Plaintiffs’ Petition for Review. This means that the Supreme Court will hear the Plaintiffs’ appeal in the case.

A brief history of how we got to this point: After a trial on liability in 2007 and damages in 2008, the trial court entered judgment in favor of the plaintiff class in May 2009. Thereafter, U.S. Bank appealed the Judgment in July 2009. Due to the size of the record, the briefing was extended and was finally complete in February 2011. After some supplemental briefing, oral argument was held in November 2011. The Court of Appeal issued a published opinion in February 2012. The Court of Appeal reversed the Judgment finding, among other things, that the Bank should have been able to assert its affirmative defense against every single class member. We firmly believe this is an erroneous opinion and fundamentally at odds with basic class action principles.

In March 2012, we filed a Petition for Review with the Supreme Court. No less than 25 other entities filed “friends of the court” letters with the Supreme Court urging the Supreme Court to accept the Petition. After briefing from both parties, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous order granting the Plaintiffs’ petition.

On May 29, 2014, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion.  While the Supreme Court rejected the many of the findings of the Court of Appeal, it did nevertheless reverse the judgment in favor of the plaintiff class.  The Supreme Court also ordered that the cases was to be decertified and remanded it back to the trial court for another determination on class certification and re-trial.

Duran Class Certification Update:
Following remand from the Supreme Court, Defendant filed a “motion to deny certification” in December 2014. Plaintiffs had hired survey expert Dr. Jon A. Krosnick of Stanford University to conduct a survey on relevant issues which he carried out at the start of 2015. In April 2015, Plaintiffs filed their opposition to Defendant’s motion which also constituted a cross-motion for class certification. Included in Plaintiffs’ motion were the results of the survey which fully supported Plaintiffs’ allegations that the case should be re-certified as a class action and that class members are entitled to their back wages. Defendant then filed a reply in October of 2015. Plaintiffs then filed their reply in November 2015.  Prior to the hearing, the Court issued an interim order on December 14, 2014 wherein the Court stated that it was “inclined to accept the general proposition that class certification in this case may properly be based in part on survey results that show a strong uniformity of class member experiences pertinent to the issue of the ‘realistic requirements of the [BBOs’] job.’”  The Court ordered that there would be a first hearing on December 22, 2015 for the purpose of discussing “the general concept of the statistical evidence model that Plaintiffs have proposed.” The Court also stated that it was inclined to appoint a neutral third-party expert to serve as the Court’s consultant on the statistical issues. The parties appeared on December 22, 2015 consistent with the Court’s order. However, for reasons not clear and never explained, defendant’s attorneys had not reviewed the Court’s order which was available for a full week before the hearing. Notwithstanding, the Court permitted the Defendant’s three attorneys present to review the order and let the Court know when they were ready to discuss it which they did. After the hearing, the Defendant’s attorneys emailed the Court and argued that they did not get an opportunity to discuss all the issues in the order and requested a second chance to re-argue the preliminary issues. Plaintiffs’ counsel objected to this request on a number of grounds. Notwithstanding, the Court allowed Defendant to come in again and argue the preliminary issue. Consequently, the parties appeared on January 14, 2016 and argued the matter. On January 20, 2016 the Court issued an order finding that Plaintiffs’ “statistical survey evidence may be used in this case to ‘plug the evidentiary hole’ the Supreme Court identified in its opinion…” The Court also stated that “the remaining and much more complicated question of whether THIS SURVEY achieves that goal remains outstanding.” The Court also reiterated its intention to appoint a neutral third party expert to assist the Court in an eventual evidentiary hearing on the issues of Plaintiffs’ survey and the analysis of that survey data.  You can read the full Order here: Court Order

Next Steps:
Plaintiffs Motion for Class Certification was denied by the Court on May 19, 2016.  Plaintiffs have appealed and filed our opening brief on February 21, 2017.  Defendant’s Opposition is due May 22, 2017.  Thereafter, Plaintiffs will file a Reply and the case will be set for oral argument.  There is no timetable for when cases are heard or decided.  It is anticipated that the Appeal will be decided by the end of 2017 or beginning of 2018.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates

First Amended Class Action Complaint (pdf)
Order Granting Class Certification (pdf)
Order Granting Motion For Summary Adjudication I (pdf)
Order Denying Petition for Writ of Mandate/Prohibition (pdf)
Order Granting Motion For Summary Adjudication II (pdf)
Statement of Decision for Phase I (pdf)
Statement of Decision for Phase II (pdf)
Judgment Against U.S. Bank National Association (pdf)
Order from California Supreme Court Granting Petition for Review (pdf)
CA Supreme Court Decision (pdf)
Order Partially Granting Plaintiffs’ Ex Parte Application (pdf)
Order Denying Class Certification

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact Ed Wynne.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact Ed Wynne.

US Bank Individual Case-Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

US District Court, Northern District of California
16-cv-03950-JSW

This is a mass action filed on behalf of over 175 BBOs who were former class members in the Duran and Trahan class actions. The case seeks to recover earned and unpaid overtime compensation based on the allegation that US Bank has misclassified its BBOs as exempt when they should be classified as nonexempt and paid overtime compensation. It is currently pending in the Northern District of California.

Please view the documents below for further information about this case:
Second Amended Complaint

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact Ed Wynne.

VNS Hotels Case-Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Angela Valentine v. Pradeep K. Khatri, VNS Hotels, Inc.
Alameda County Superior Court
Case No. RG16813080

This is a putative class action against VNS Hotels, Inc. on behalf of all current and former employees who were employed in the state of California at any time between April 25, 2012 and February 10, 2017. The case was filed in the Alameda County Superior Court, California. The action seeks to recover damages for failure to pay for overtime, premium rates for overtime, off-the-clock work, missed meal and rest breaks, expenses incurred in the course of business and for waiting time penalties.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact J.E.B. Pickett.

Please view the documents below for further information about this case:
Complaint
First Amended Complaint

Wells Fargo Loan Officer Case – Wage & Hour Class Action

Wage & Hour Class Action

Case Status: CURRENT

Nguyen v. Wells Fargo
United States District Court, Northern District
Case No. 15-cv-05239

This is a putative class action against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. on behalf of current and former Loan Officers who forfeited paid time off, were not reimbursed for all of their business related expenses and who were subject to unlawful deductions from their compensation.

Please view the documents below for further information about this case:
Complaint
First Amended Complaint

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact Ed Wynne.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact Ed Wynne.

Westamerica Assistant Customer Service Manager Case-Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CURRENT

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact J.E.B. Pickett.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact J.E.B. Pickett.

Recently Closed Employment Cases

Aldo- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on October 7, 2009 on behalf of current and former salaried Aldo employees in California. The complaint alleges that Aldo misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

American Greetings & Carlton Cards- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of current and former salaried American Greetings and Carlton Cards employees in California. The complaint alleges that American Greetings and Carlton Cards misclassified their employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

The Final Approval Hearing is Scheduled for July 21, 2006.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Final Approval Order (pdf)
Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Ameriquest- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of current and former California based hourly nonexempt branch personnel who worked and/or are working as Account Executives. The complaint alleges that Ameriquest failed to properly pay overtime compensation on their incentive pay.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Banc of America- Broker Case

Broker Case

Case Status: CLOSED

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Boston Market- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on April 14, 2003 on behalf of current and former salaried General Managers in California. The complaint alleges that Boston Market misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

The court granted final approval to a class wide settlement that brings a conclusion to this litigation. Plaintiffs recovered monetary payments to compensate the class for overtime wages denied pursuant to Boston Market’s exemption policy. Payment to the participating class members was mailed on March 31, 2005.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
First Amended Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Burakoff v. US Bancorp Investments- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

These case alleges two theories of liability: overtime and improper wage deductions. On overtime, the brokers are entitled to overtime compensation because the employer is not engaged in a retail enterprise, the brokers were not paid a salary, and the brokers are primarily engaged in sales work. The theory of improper wage deductions is the brokers are illegally charged for such office overhead items as secretarial staff, postage, phone calls, and the costs of trades undone without a showing of culpable negligence on the part of the brokers.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

California Pizza- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Carmax- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on September 19, 2007 on behalf of current and former salaried Carmax employees in California. The complaint alleges that Carmax misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

This case has recently settled. A Hearing for Final Approval is currently scheduled for August 12, 2009. The Notice Packet and Claim Form have been mailed out. The deadline to return the form is June 13, 2009. If you have not reveived a Notice Packet, please call our office at 1-877-352-6400.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Chase BBO Case-Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

Paparella, et al. v. JPMorgan Chase Bank
Orange County Superior Court
Case No. 2010-00370146

Wynne Law Firm has filed a putative class action against JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (“Chase”) on behalf of current and former salaried Business Bankers (“BB’s”) seeking overtime compensation in the Superior Court of Orange County, California. The action seeks to cover BB’s in California who worked between September 25, 2008 to the present. The action seeks to recover earned and unpaid overtime compensation based on the allegation that Chase has misclassified its BB’s as exempt when they should be classified as nonexempt and paid overtime compensation. The complaint alleges that on or about September 25, 2008, JPMorgan Chase & Co. purchased the deposits, assets and certain liabilities of Washington Mutual Bank’s banking operations from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Washington Mutual Bank had branch locations in California. After the purchase, JPMorgan Chase & Co. began operating the former Washington Mutual bank branches in California under the name “Chase.”

There is a common misconception that salaried employees cannot receive overtime. Many employees are often told they are “exempt” from overtime because they are salaried. This is not always correct. It is a general rule that employees are entitled to overtime compensation. Employees who are “exempt” from this rule are not entitled to overtime compensation. The laws that govern the payment of wages are designed to protect employees. Thus, exemptions or reasons for not paying overtime are narrowly construed against the employer. Based on our experience, we believe that Chase may try to claim that BB’s are exempt pursuant to the administrative exemption as a reason not to pay BB for overtime compensation. We believe this claim lacks merit and that overtime compensation is owed

The administrative exemption, under California law is designed for employees who perform office or non-manual work that directly relates to the management or the general business operations of the employer or employer’s customers. The phrase “directly related to management policies or general business operations of his employer or his employer’s customers” describes those types of activities relating to the administrative operations of a business, as distinguished from “production” or, in a retail or service establishment, “sales” work. Thus, employees who do not “administer” but who “sell” an employer’s goods or services are nonexempt under the administrative exemption and are thus owed overtime compensation. Because it is our belief that BB at Chase are primarily engaged in sales, we contend the administrative exemption does not apply and therefore they are owed overtime compensation.

To view the Court’s website for this case click here: https://ocapps.occourts.org/civilwebShoppingNS/Search.do#top

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Order Granting Motion to Remand (pdf)
Complaint (pdf)
May 2010 Newsletter (pdf)

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact Contact Ed Wynne.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Chase Investment Services Financial Advisor Case-Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

Alakozai v. Chase Investment Services
US District Court, Central District of California
Case No. CV-11-09178

This is a putative class action brought on behalf of a class of employees entitled Financial Advisors of Chase Investment Services Corp in California who have been misclassified as exempt as opposed to non-exempt under California law and thereby denied overtime compensation. Plaintiffs also allege that the class has been subject to improper wage deductions and unreimbursed business expenses and seek derivative penalties under the California Labor Code.

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact Contact Ed Wynne.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Children’s Place- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on April 1, 2004 on behalf of current and former salaried Children’s Place employees in California. The complaint alleges that Children’s Place misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

Final Approval Hearing is set for July 14, 2006.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Chuck E. Cheese- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of current and former salaried Chuck E Cheese employees in California. The complaint alleges that Chuck E Cheese misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

The court granted final approval to a class wide settlement that brings a conclusion to this litigation. Plaintiffs recovered monetary payments to compensate the class for overtime wages denied pursuant to Chuck E. Cheese’s exemption policy. Payment was mailed to the participating class members on July 15, 2004.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Claim Form (pdf)
Class Action Complaint (html)
Notice of Class Action Settlement (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Citibank- Broker Case

Broker Case

Case Status: CLOSED

This case alleges two theories of liability: overtime and improper wage deductions. On overtime, the business bankers are entitled to overtime compensation because the employer is not engaged in a retail enterprise, the business bankers were not paid a salary, and the business bankers are primarily engaged in sales work. The theory of improper wage deductions is the business bankers are illegally charged for such office overhead items as secretarial staff, postage, phone calls, and the costs of trades undone without a showing of culpable negligence on the part of the business bankers.

A Final Approval Hearing was held in September 2010. The case has settled and settlement checks have been distributed.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Conditional Certification (pdf)
Second Amended Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Coca-Cola- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

We anticipate Preliminary Approval in October of this year.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

David’s Bridal- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

A Further Status Conference is scheduled for September 27, 2006.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
First Amended Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

DS Waters Route Sales Representative Case- Wage & Hour

 Wage & Hour

Case Status: CLOSED

Hector Sarinana v. DS Waters of American, Inc.
US District Court, Central District of California
Case No. CV-13-00905

This is a putative nationwide class action brought on behalf of overtime eligible employees of DS Waters of America, Inc. whose overtime rate was not properly calculated, who were not paid minimum wage, who were not provided proper wage statements and who were not paid all wages at time of termination.

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact Ed Wynne.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact Ed Wynne.

EB Games- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on November 21, 2003 on behalf of current and former salaried retail store employees in California. The complaint alleges that EB Games misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

The court granted final approval to a class wide settlement that brings a conclusion to this litigation. Plaintiffs recovered monetary payments to compensate the class for overtime wages denied pursuant to EB Games’ exemption policy. Payment was mailed to the participating class members on March 7, 2005.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Ewing Irrigation- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

Dennis K. Yamashiro v. Ewing Irrigation Products, Inc.
Alameda County Superior Court
Case No. RG11575582

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on May 13, 2011 on behalf of current and former salaried Ewing Branch Managers in California. The complaint alleges that Ewing misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

To view the Court website for this case click here:
http://apps.alameda.courts.ca.gov/domainweb/html/index.html

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Complaint (pdf)
Order Granting Class Certification (pdf)

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact Contact Ed Wynne.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Fresno Beverage- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

The Final Approval Hearing is set for October 4, 2006.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Friendly Call Case- Wage & Hour

 Wage & Hour

Case Status: CLOSED

Kenneth Howell, Samarrie Henry, Karlissa Harvey v. Friendly Call, Inc.
Los Angeles County Superior Court
Case No. BC561118
Filed: October 17, 2014

Case Summary
Plaintiffs allege that Defendants, who owned and operated a telemarketing company, failed and refused to pay them for all hours worked by falsely claiming some of their work was merely an “audition” for the job and also by only paying for time when the employees were placing calls. All other work time was not compensated.

To review the register of actions for this case, click here:
Los Angeles County Superior Court Case Summary

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Complaint

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact Ed Wynne.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact Ed Wynne.


Toggle Content (click to open)

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on September 26, 2007 in Los Angeles County Superior Court on behalf of current and former salaried Galpin Motors’ employees in California. The complaint alleges that Galpin Motors misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Hanesbrand- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on May 22, 2007 on behalf of current and former salaried Hanesbrand employees. The complaint alleges that Hanesbrand misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

This case has settled. A hearing for Final Approval was held on March 10, 2009. Settlement checks should be mailed out at the beginning of June 2009.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Hoop Retail Store/The Disney Store- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on July 7, 2006 on behalf of current and former salaried Hoop Retail Store employees in California. The complaint alleges that Hoop Retail Store misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification was heard and granted on December 16, 2008.

This case has settled. Claim forms were recently mail out. All signed claim forms must be post marked no later than December 11, 2009 in order to participcate in the settlement.

The hearing for the Motion for Final Approval is currently scheduled for February 4, 2010.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Knox & Associates- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on August 29, 2006 on behalf of current and former salaried Knox & Associates’ employees in California. The complaint alleges that Knox & Associates misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

This case has settled. Notice Packets have been mailed to members of the class. In order to participate in the settlement, Claim Forms must have been postmarked no later than February 5, 2009.

Settlement checks will be mailed out in late March 2009.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Noah’s Bagels (Einstein)- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of current and former salaried employees who worked for Noah’s Bagels in California. The complaint alleges that Noah’s misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

The Court granted preliminary approval of a class action settlement. The notice and the claim form was sent to the class on June 8, 2005. In order to receive funds from the settlement, class members must return the claim form no later than August 3, 2005.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Amended Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Overton Security Officer Case-Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates

Amended Complaint

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact J.E.B. Pickett.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact J.E.B. Pickett.

Pac Pizza- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of current and former salaried Pac Pizza employees in California. The complaint alleges that Pac Pizza misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

The court granted final approval to a class wide settlement that brings a conclusion to this litigation. Plaintiffs recovered monetary payments to compensate the class for overtime wages denied pursuant to Pac Pizza’s exemption policy.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Papyrus- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Piper Jaffray- Broker Case

Broker Case

Case Status: CLOSED

The Notice packets were recently mailed to the Settlement Class. Below are copies of the Notice and the forms included in the Notice packets. Please note that in order to participate in this settlement the deadline to submit both the Consent to Join and Claim forms to the Claims Administrator, Rust Consulting, is January 14, 2008. The forms below are samples and should not be submitted to the Claims Administrator. If you would like to request any of the following, please contact Rust Consulting at 1-800-373-9651.

To learn more about this litigation, please visit www.piperjaffrayotsettlement.com.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Claim Form (pdf)
Consent to Join Settlement form (pdf)
Exclusion Form (pdf)
Notice to Class (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Pizza Hut I- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of current and former salaried Pizza Hut employees in California. The complaint alleges that Pizza Hut misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

The court granted final approval to a class wide settlement that brings a conclusion to this litigation. Plaintiffs recovered monetary payments to compensate the class for overtime wages denied pursuant to Pizza Hut’s exemption policy.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Pizza Hut II- Vacation Wages Class Action

Vacation Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Protiviti- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This case was filed on April 4, 2006 and was amended on March 4, 2008. A copy of the Amended Complaint is posted below. The case covers both Consultants and Senior Consultants in Protiviti’s three lines of service: Technology, Business Risk, and Internal Audit. The case alleges that these employees were improperly and illegally misclassified under California law as exempt employees when in fact they were nonexempt employees and therefore are entitled to overtime compensation and other derivative claims.

The case was certified as a class action by Judge Minning on February 5, 2009. A copy of the order is posted below for your review.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Pricewaterhousecoopers - Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This case alleges that Uncertified Associates who worked for PricewaterhouseCoopers are entitled to unpaid wages for overtime work for which they did not receive overtime premium pay.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Order Granting Motion for Conditional Certification (pdf)

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact Ed Wynne.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact Ed Wynne.

PVH Case-Wage & Hour

Wage & Hour

Case Status: CLOSED

Jeffrey Lapan, Ashwin Chandra v. PVH Corp.
US District Court, Northern District of California
Case No. CV-13-05006

This is a putative nationwide class action brought on behalf of all employees paid through PVH Corp’s payroll card program. Plaintiffs allege that PVH Corp’s payroll card program caused its employees to not be paid all of the wages due and owing in the form of minimum wages and overtime compensation. Plaintiffs allege that PVH Corp. did not pay all of the wages due to its employees at the time of termination and that PVH Corp. failed to provide accurate wage statements.

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact Ed Wynne.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact Ed Wynne.

RLLW, Inc.- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of current and former salaried RLLW employees in California. The complaint alleges that RLLW misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

The court granted final approval to a class wide settlement that brings a conclusion to this litigation. Plaintiffs recovered monetary payments to compensate the class for overtime wages denied pursuant to RLLW’s exemption policy. Payment should be mailed to the participating class members in July 2005.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Order Granting Class Certification (doc)

Class Action Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Round Table- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of current and former salaried Round Table General Managers in California. The complaint alleges that Round Table misclassified its General Managers as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

The next Case Management Conference is set for August 22, 2005.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Complaint (pdf)
Court Finds Defendant Violated Court Order (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Rubio Arts- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

We have appealed the court’s order compelling arbitration of Encheff’s claim. We are currently opposing defendant’s motion to stay the case at it relates to former employees employed prior to January 20, 2006. The determination on that motion will be made August 14, 2006.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Sav-On- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed April 3, 2000 on behalf of current and former Operations Managers and Assistant Managers in California. The complaint alleges that Sav On misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

In Rocher, et al., v. Sav-On employees alleged that Sav-On had failed to pay overtime compensation to California based assistant managers and operating managers. The court of appeal reversed the trial court’s order certifying the case as a class action. Righetti Wynne petitioned the Supreme Court asking the Court to review the court of appeal decision. The Supreme Court granted review and, in a closely watched decision, unanimously reinstated the trial court’s certification order by reversing the court of appeal. The decision is a great victory for employees in California who seek to enforce California’s labor laws. The decision also has application to class actions well beyond enforcement of California’s labor laws. To read the full text of the Supreme Court’s decision please follow the link below.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Notice to Class (pdf)
CA Supreme Court Decision (pdf)
Class Certification (html)
Claim Form (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Save Mart I- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of current and former salaried Save Mart employees in California. The complaint alleges that Save Mart misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

The court granted final approval to a class wide settlement that brings a conclusion to this litigation. Plaintiffs recovered monetary payments to compensate the class for overtime wages denied pursuant to Save Mart’s exemption policy. Payment was mailed to the participating class members on August 6, 2004.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Class Action Complaint (pdf)
SaveMart Grocery Manager Survey Questionnaire (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Save Mart II- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

The Final Approval Hearing is set for August 3, 2006.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Shurgard Storage Centers, Inc.- FLSA Collective Action for Unpaid Compensation

FLSA Collective Action for Unpaid Compensation

Case Status: CLOSED

This FLSA Collective Action Case was filed on behalf of all former and currently employed Shurgard Store Managers, Managers-in-Training and Team Trainers who worked in the United States for Shurgard at any time between October 31, 1999 and the present. The Complaint alleges that these employees were not compensated for time worked off-the clock and were not compensated for uninterrupted meal periods and the required use of personal vehicles for company business.

The case has settled. The Parties’ Joint Motion for Preliminary Approval was granted by the Court on May 27, 2005. The notice of the settlement was mailed to the Federal Class (those who “opted-in” to the suit by signing a consent to join form) on June 24, 2005, and to the California Class (those who worked in California in one or more of the positions listed above anytime between 10/30/1998 and 03/31/2004) on June 30, 2005.

For more information please contact our office toll-free at 800-447-5549.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Complaint (pdf)
Consent Form (pdf)
Corrective Notice (pdf)
Newsletter #1 (pdf)
Stipulation and Order of Approval of Court Facilitated Notice and Tolling of Statute Limitations (doc)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Spencer Gifts- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of current and former salaried Spencer Gift employees in California. The complaint alleges that Spencer Gifts misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

The case has settled. Preliminary approval of the class action settlement was granted, and the notice to the class was mailed on July 6, 2005.

If you wish to participate please contact our office toll-free at 800-447-5549.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
First Amended Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Starving Students- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
First Amended Complaint (html)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Taco Bell- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on August 4, 2006 on behalf of current and former salaried Taco Bell General Managers in California. The complaint alleges that Taco Bell misclassified its General Managers as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

This case was recently transferred back to the California Superior Court, County of San Diego.

The hearing on the Motion for Class Certification is currently scheduled for January 29, 2010.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Order and Judgment Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlement (pdf)
Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Target- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of current and former salaried Executive Team Leaders who worked for Target in California. The complaint alleges that Target misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

The Class Certification Hearing was held on June 13, 2006. The judge took the ruling under submission, this means that we are waiting to hear from the court on his decision. We will keep you updated as we receive new information.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
First Amended Complaint (pdf)
July 2004 Newsletter (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

The Gap- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

The case has settled in principle and we are preparing paperwork for the Court’s approval.

The preliminary approval hearing is currently set for September 27, 2004.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Complaint (pdf)
Newsletter (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Trak Auto- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Tully’s Coffee- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on February 19, 2004 on behalf of current and former salaried Tully’s employees in California. The complaint alleges that Tully’s misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

The case has been settled in principle and we are currently in the process of drafting the documents for the final approval of the settlement. The hearing date for the final approval is currently set for September 14, 2004.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Complaint (pdf)
Newsletter (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

US Bank BBO Litigation #2- Overtime Wages Class Action

 Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

Trahan v. US Bank, N.A.

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on May 28, 2009, on behalf of current and former Business Banking Officers in California. The Trahan v. US Bank complaint alleges that BBOs who started after September 26, 2007 in California were misclassified as exempt and therefore owed overtime compensation. It is our opinion that US Bank will primarily claim that BBOs are not owed overtime because they are exempt under the “outside sales exemption” just like it did in the Duran v. USB case. We believe this claim has no merit. The outside sales exemption under California law is designed for employees who are primarily engaged (over 50% of their time) in making sales away from the employer’s place or places of business. Generally, this means that the employee spends most of his/her time at the customer’s place of business like a traveling salesperson. However, if an employee spends most of his/her time inside the employer’s place or places of business, the employer will not be able to claim the outside sales exemption and overtime compensation will be owed for all overtime hours worked assuming no other exemption applies.

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification (pdf)
June 2009 Newsletter (pdf)
May 2010 Newsletter (pdf)

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact Ed Wynne.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, please contact Ed Wynne.

US Bank Mortgage Loan Office Case-Wage & Hour

 Wage & Hour

Case Status: CLOSED

Barber, et al. v. US Bank, N.A.
Contra Costa County Superior Court
Case No. MSC11-02173

This is a putative class action brought on behalf of all current and former mortgage loan officers who were not reimbursed for all of their business related expenses and who were subject to unlawful deductions from their compensation.

To view the Court’s website for this case click here:
http://icms.cc-courts.org/iotw/

To Join the Class
In any class action suit, the court stipulates a window of eligibility for participation in the class. If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this suit, please contact Contact Ed Wynne.

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Vitamin Shoppe- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Third Amended Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Wachovia- Broker Case

Broker Case

Case Status: CLOSED

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Washington Mutual- Broker Case

Broker Case

Case Status: CLOSED

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
First Amended Complaint (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.

Wendy’s- Overtime Wages Class Action

Overtime Wages Class Action

Case Status: CLOSED

This overtime wage class action lawsuit was filed on December 26, 2001 on behalf of current and former salaried Wendy’s employees in California. The complaint alleges that Wendy’s misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime pay: under California law, employees who spend the majority of their time at work performing “non-managerial” duties are entitled to overtime pay even if they are paid on salary or hold the title of manager.

The court granted preliminary approval to a class wide settlement. Plaintiffs recovered monetary payments to compensate the class for overtime wages denied pursuant to Wendy’s exemption policy. In order to participate in this settlement, individuals had to complete and return the Claim Form on or before March 11, 2005. A copy is provided below.

Final Approval was granted on April 18, 2005

Pleadings, Orders, Correspondence, and Updates
Newsletter (pdf)
Complaint (pdf)
Complaint (pdf)
Notice of Settlement (pdf)

More Information
If you wish to obtain additional information about this litigation, or if you have questions about similar cases being handled by us, or questions concerning your rights as an employee, Contact Ed Wynne.