CALIFORNIA CLASS ACTION LAW

September 26, 2010

After a Dispute Among Counsel for a Putative Class Regarding the Sharing of Attorneys Fees, the Northern District Denied a Motion to Terminate Counsel of Record

: Image by Getty Images via @daylife

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California denied plaintiffs’ motion to terminate its counsel of record and appointed a special master in Red v. Unilever PLC, No. C 10-00387 JW, 2010 WL 3629689 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 14, 2010). Certain plaintiffs in a class action filed a notice of termination of Beck & Lee and Reese Richman LLP as counsel. Id. *1.

Background

Plaintiffs allege in the class action that Defendants engaged in false advertising for the product “I Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter!” Id. Three law firms undertook representation of the named Plaintiffs and the putative class, pursuant to a Joint Prosecution Agreement. Id. *2. On August 16, 2010, Mr. Weston, one of Plaintiffs’ attorneys of record, filed a Notice of Termination, effectively moving to terminate the Reese Richman and Beck & Lee firms as co-counsel for Plaintiffs. Id. *1. Two days later, Beck & Lee filed an Opposition to the Notice, charging the Weston Firm with engaging in “a shocking course of unethical and bad faith conduct.” Id. Beck & Lee’s Opposition contended, inter alia, that: Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a comment

September 25, 2010

Central District Denies Motion to Compel Class Arbitration, But Grants Stay Pending Outcome of Supreme Court’s Decision in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion

: Image by ingirogiro via Flickr

The United States District Court for the Central District of California denied a class action defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, but granted its motion to stay. Lopez v. American Express Bank, FSB, No. CV 09-07335 SJO (MANx), 2010 WL 3637755 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 17, 2010).

Plaintiffs sued Defendants American Express Bank, FSB, and American Express Centurion Bank’s (collectively, “Defendants”) alleging causes of action relating to the terms and conditions of credit cards. Id. *1. Defendants moved to compel arbitration. Id. The Court denied, finding that the class action waiver contained in the Agreement between the parties was unconscionable under California law, and therefore, the Plaintiffs could not be compelled to arbitrate. Id. Defendants brought the present motion to reconsider.

The Court determined that the Supreme Court’s grant of certiorari in AT & T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, — U.S. —-, 130 S. Ct. 3322, — L. Ed. 2d —-, 2010 WL 303962 (May 24, 2010) constitutes a material difference in fact and law, potential change in controlling law, and justifiable reason to reconsider its prior. Id. *3.

The specific question that the Supreme Court will resolve is: Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a comment

September 24, 2010

Southern District Grants Class Certification Granted in Labor Code Class Action

: Image via Wikipedia

The Southern District of California granted class certification in a vacation, uniform, paycheck, wage and contract class action. Lopez v. G.A.T. Airline Ground Support, Inc., No. 09cv2268-IEG(BGS), 2010 WL 3633177 (S.D. Cal. Sept. 13, 2010) (slip op.).

Background

Former employees of Defendant G.A.T. Airline Ground Support, Inc. (“GAT”) sued for systematic wage and hour violations in violation of federal and state law. Id. *1. GAT provides services to airlines, including ground transportation, aircraft maintenance, and cargo operations management. Id. The four named Plaintiffs are former ramp agents employed by GAT in California. Id.

Rule 23(a) Commonality

The court found questions of law or fact common to the class with respect to plaintiffs’ vacation, uniform, paycheck, wage, and contract claims:

Here, as explained in detail below, Plaintiffs present both factual evidence of GAT’s company-wide policies and practices as well as anecdotal evidence in the form of class member declarations regarding the application of those challenged policies and practices. Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a comment

September 21, 2010

Central District Orders Pre-Certification Disclosure of Name and Contact Information for Putative Class Members, Finding that Such Disclosure Was “Common Practice” in Class Actions

: Image via Wikipedia

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 »

Leave a comment

September 20, 2010

Northern District Holds That No Aiding and Abetting Liability Exists Under UCL

: Image by Tyler Yip via Flickr

The Northern District of California granted a motion to strike aiding and abetting allegations from a class action complaint. Toy v. Triwire Engineering Solutions, Inc., No. C 10-1929 SI, 2010 WL 3448535 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 1, 2010) (slip op.).

Background

Plaintiff Jason Toy filed a putative class action in state court against defendants TriWire Engineering Solutions, Inc., Comcast Corporation, and Comcast Cable Communications Management LLC, alleging that TriWire and Comcast employed Toy as a cable technician to install, disconnect, and upgrade cable television and computer services for consumers throughout California. Id. *1. Plaintiff contended he was not exempt from overtime requirements, and was not paid overtime in accordance with the law. Id. Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a comment

September 19, 2010

Second District Affirms Denial of Certification of Class of Junk Fax Recipients for Lack of Ascertainability

: Image via Wikipedia

The Second District affirmed denial of certification of a class of recipients of unsolicited faxes. Law Offices of Hermez Moreno v. Travelcomm Industries, Inc., B214807, 2010 WL 3610131 (Cal. Ct. App. 2d Dist. Sept. 17, 2010). Plaintiff and appellant Law Offices of Hermez Moreno brought a putative class action under 47 United States Code section 227, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA), and Business and Professions Code 17538.43 alleging that defendants and respondents Travelcomm Industries, Inc. and others had sent unsolicited faxes. Id. *1. The trial court denied class certification based on findings that plaintiff had failed to present substantial evidence that a community of interest existed such that common questions of law and fact would predominate. As a separate basis, the court found that appellant had failed to present substantial evidence that the class was ascertainable. Id. Plaintiff appealed. Id. *1. Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a comment

September 17, 2010

Ninth Circuit Holds That “Crux of Complaint” Rule Allows Courts to Decide Arbitrability Even Where Plaintiff Fails to Raise Challenge to Arbitrability as a Distinct Claim in Complaint

: Image by taberandrew via Flickr

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals considered whether the “crux of the complaint” rule requires the question of arbitrability to be determined by the arbitrator when a plaintiff’s challenge to the arbitration clause does not appear in his complaint. Bridge Fund Capital Corporation v. Fastbucks Franchise Corporation, No. 08-17071, 2010 WL 3584060 (9th Cir. Sept. 16, 2010). The court held that “as long as the plaintiff’s challenge to the validity of an arbitration clause is a distinct question from the validity of the contract as a whole, the question of arbitrability is for the court to decide regardless of whether the specific challenge to the arbitration clause is raised as a distinct claim in the complaint.” Id. *1. Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a comment

September 16, 2010

Ninth Circuit Reverses Certification Decision for Failure to Properly Conduct Predominance Inquiry

: Image by Kai Hendry via Flickr

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Kelley v. Microsoft Corporation, No. 09-35699, 2010 WL 3556196 (9th Cir. Sept. 14, 2010) (slip op.) reversed in part a class certification decision for failure to properly conduct the predominance inquiry under Rule 23(b)(3). Id. *1. The case involves alleged misrepresentations and omissions in Microsoft Corporation’s (“Microsoft”) pre-release marketing of its Windows Vista operating system. Id. Plaintiffs-Appellants appealed the denial of their motion for narrowed class certification of two classes proposed after the district court decertified their original class. Id. Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a comment

September 12, 2010

Northern District Rejects Defendant’s Motion to Communicate Ex Parte With Class Members

Image by Frank Kehren via Flickr

The Northern District denied a class defendant’s request to communicate ex parte with class members. Kirola v. City and County of San Francisco, No. C 07-03685 SBA, 2010 WL 3505041 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 7, 2010). Defendant City and County of San Francisco (“City”) brought an administrative motion, seeking authorization to communicate with eight specific class members. Id. The City contended that free communication with these individuals is essential to allow the City to prepare adequately for trial. Id. The City sought to “present their testimony at trial in order to establish its policies and practices regarding physical access, which is the core issue in this case.” Id. Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a comment

September 10, 2010

Northern District Rejects Collateral Estoppel, Finding Sufficient Difference in Allegedly Misleading Statements

: Image via Wikipedia

The Northern District denied a motion to strike class allegations from a putative class action complaint, finding sufficient difference between the allegedly deceptive statements in the prior case and the present case to reject defendant’s collateral estoppel contentions. Murray v. Sears, Roebuck and Co., No. 09-05744 CW, 2010 WL 3490214 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 3, 2010) (slip op.). Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a comment