Williams v. Superior Court
3 Cal.5th 531 (Cal. 2017) Cited 231 times 12 Legal AnalysesConcluding fear of retaliation cuts in favor of "facilitating collective actions so that individual employees need not run the risk of individual suits"
Dynamex Operations W., Inc. v. Superior Court
4 Cal.5th 903 (Cal. 2018) Cited 202 times 145 Legal AnalysesHolding that a hiring entity's failure to prove any one of these three prerequisites is sufficient to establish that a worker is an employee, rather than an independent contractor
Huff v. Securitas Sec. Servs. USA, Inc.
23 Cal.App.5th 745 (Cal. Ct. App. 2018) Cited 58 times 8 Legal AnalysesRefusing to interpret statute prior to retrial
Zackaria v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
142 F. Supp. 3d 949 (C.D. Cal. 2015) Cited 15 timesFinding the defendant's manageability argument "inconsistent with PAGA's purpose and statutory scheme" because the manageability requirement "finds its genesis in Rule 23"
Heredia v. Eddie Bauer LLC
Case No. 16-cv-06236-BLF (N.D. Cal. Mar. 27, 2020)Case No. 16-cv-06236-BLF 03-27-2020 STEPHANIE HEREDIA, Plaintiff, v. EDDIE BAUER LLC, Defendant. BETH LABSON FREEMAN United States District Judge ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT EDDIE BAUER'S MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF'S REPRESENTATIVE PAGA ACTION CLAIMS OR, ALTERNATIVELY, FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS [Re: ECF 83] This case started as a wage and hour class action alleging that Eddie Bauer ("Defendant") failed to compensate its hourly employees for time spent undergoing off-the-clock security "exit inspections"