Skip to Content

Class Action Blog

As society becomes increasingly litigious, and as plaintiff attorneys market their services more aggressively, class action litigation is posing a rapidly growing threat to businesses in all sectors.

Class Action Blog
December 2, 2018

Ninth Circuit: Same Injuries in State Class Action Settlement Barred Later Filed Federal Fair Labor Standards Act Collective Action

Summary: Three PLS Check Cashers’ (“PLS”) employees filed a consolidated class action complaint asserting violations of several wage and hour and wage statement provisions of the California Labor Code. They settled their state class action claims on a class basis and obtained final court approval under California’s counterpart to Federal Rule 23, resulting in a state court judgment, referred to as the Dieguez settlement. The judgment order stated in part that “Class Members shall take nothing from defendants… except as expressly set forth in the Joint Stipulation of Settlement and Release.” Notice was given to the class members who were given an opportunity to opt out of the settlement class. Pearl Rangel, a PLS worker, was a member of the Dieguez settlement class. She did not opt out and she did not object to the settlement.

Class Action Blog
November 18, 2018

Ninth Circuit Holds That Plaintiffs Are Not Required to Support Class Certification Motions by Admissible Evidence

Nurses Sali and Spriggs moved to certify seven classes of registered nurses allegedly underpaid by Corona Regional Medical Center (“Corona”) as a result of its employment policies and practices. The district court denied class certification for all of the proposed classes on multiple grounds including some of the classes failed to meet Federal Rule 23(b)(3)’s predominance requirement, none of the classes satisfied Rule 23(a)’s typicality requirement, Spriggs was not an adequate class representative because not a member of any of the proposed classes, and the attorneys were inadequate because they “had not demonstrated they [would] adequately serve as class counsel.” After Sali and Spriggs appealed, they moved to stay the appeal while the California courts ruled on some state law substantive issues. After the state courts ruled, Sali and Spriggs limited their appeal to four of the seven original classes. The 9th Circuit reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

Class Action Blog
September 24, 2018

Third Circuit Affirms Class Certification Denial of Nationwide and Four-State Classes

Patricia Wright and Kevin West sued Owens Corning and Owens Corning Sales, LLC (“Owens Corning”) in Pennsylvania pursuing a nationwide class action case for allegedly selling defective roofing shingles. The summary judgment ruling in favor of the Defendants was partially reversed on appeal which led Wright and West to join with Jaime Gonzalez and others in filing similar suits in California, Illinois, Pennsylvania, and Texas. Those cases were then transferred and consolidated in Pennsylvania. The District Court denied the motion to certify the Nationwide and Four-State Class Action cases, rulings the 3rd Circuit affirmed in March of 2018. The case was before the 3rd Circuit on a Rule 23(f) appeal.