Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp.

Holding that " common nucleus of facts and potential legal remedies dominate[d]" over "idiosyncratic differences between state consumer protection laws" where a nationwide class of minivan buyers’ claims turned on "questions of [the manufacturer’s] prior knowledge of the [vehicle’s] deficiency, the design defect, and a damages remedy"

Staton v. Boeing Co.

Holding that "named plaintiffs ... are eligible for reasonable incentive payments" in addition to reimbursement "for their substantiated litigation expenses, and identifiable services rendered to the class directly under the supervision of class counsel"

Boeing Co. v. Van Gemert

Holding that the district court properly assessed attorney's fees based on the total fund available to the prevailing class rather than the amount actually recovered

Ketchum v. Moses

Holding that "the party seeking a fee enhancement bears the burden of proof

Vizcaino v. Microsoft Corp.

Holding state law governing underlying claims in a diversity action “also governs the award of fees”

Sav-On Drug Stores, Inc. v. Superior Court

Holding that common questions predominated in overtime case brought by chain store managers

Linder v. Thrifty Oil Co.

Reversing and remanding for reconsideration because the court was not "prepared to say that class treatment necessarily is proper," and "upon a fresh look [the trial court] may discern valid reasons for denying" the certification motion

Six Mexican Wkrs. v. Ariz. Citrus Growers

Holding the "district court did not abuse its discretion by calculating attorneys' fees as a percentage of the total fund" in a similar statutory regime where discrete violations totaled either $250 or $500

Serrano v. Priest

Holding that denying benefits of the private attorney general rule to funded public-interest attorneys would be essentially inconsistent with the rule itself

Ramirez v. Yosemite Water Co.

Holding that when a court evaluates if an employee was primarily engaged in exempt duties for purposes of the administrative exemption to overtime pay, it must consider "how the employee actually spends his or her time" and also "whether the employee's practice diverges from the employer's realistic expectations"

Section 226 - Itemized statement of wages

Providing only statutory penalties

Section 2698 - Title of part

Section 200 - Definitions

Applying this definition to "this article," meaning Cal. Lab. Code §§ 200 – 244

Section 223 - Payments below scale

Making it unlawful to "secretly pay a lower wage while purporting to pay the wage designated by statute or by contract"