LAFFITTE v. ROBERT HALF INTERNATIONAL (BRENNAN)

Respondents, Robert Half International, Inc., Robert Half of California, Inc., Robert Half Incorporated, and Robert Half Corporation, Answer Brief on the Merits

Cal.August 26, 2015

SUPREME CouRT Case No. $222996 PEETS SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AUG 2 6 2015 MARK LAFFITTE,etal., Frank A. Mot3uire Clerk Plaintiffs and Respondents, Deputy VS. ROBERT HALF INTERNATIONALINC,, et al., Defendants and Respondents, DAVID BRENNAN, Plaintiffand Appellant. Court of Appeal of the State of California 2nd Civil No. B249253 Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles The Honorable Mary H.Strobel, Judge Presiding Civil Case No. BC321317 [related to BC455499 and BC377930] BRIEF OF RESPONDENTS ROBERT HALF INTERNATIONALINC. AND AFFILIATES PAUL HASTINGS LLP PAUL HASTINGS LLP JUDITH M. KLINE (SB# 157354) M.KIRBY C. WILCOX (SB# 078576) 515 South FlowerStreet, 25th Floor 55 Second Street, 24th Floor Los Angeles, California 90071 San Francisco, California 94105 Telephone: (213) 683-6000 Telephone: (415) 856-7000 Facsimile: (213) 627-0705 Facsimile: (415) 856-7100 Attorneys for Respondents ROBERT HALF INTERNATIONAL INC.; ROBERT HALF OF CALIFORNIA INC.; ROBERT HALF INCORPORATED;and ROBERT HALF CORPORATION Case No. 8222996 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA MARK LAFFITTE,et al., Plaintiffs and Respondents, VS. ROBERT HALF INTERNATIONALINC.,, et al., Defendants and Respondents, DAVID BRENNAN, Plaintiffand Appellant. Court ofAppeal of the State of California 2nd Civil No. B249253 Superior Court ofthe State of California, County of Los Angeles The Honorable Mary H.Strobel, Judge Presiding Civil Case No. BC321317 [related to BC455499 and BC377930] BRIEF OF RESPONDENTS ROBERT HALF INTERNATIONALINC. AND AFFILIATES PAUL HASTINGS LLP PAUL HASTINGS LLP JUDITH M. KLINE (SB# 157354) M. KIRBY C. WILCOX (SB# 078576) 515 South Flower Street, 25th Floor 55 Second Street, 24th Floor Los Angeles, California 90071 San Francisco, California 94105 Telephone: (213) 683-6000 Telephone: (415) 856-7000 Facsimile: (213) 627-0705 Facsimile: (415) 856-7100 Attorneys for Respondents ROBERT HALF INTERNATIONAL INC.; ROBERT HALF OF CALIFORNIA INC.; ROBERT HALF INCORPORATED; and ROBERT HALF CORPORATION CERTIFICATION OF INTERESTED ENTITIES OR PERSONS $222996 -LAFFITTE v. ROBERT HALF INTERNATIONAL(BRENNAN} Full Name of Interested Entity/Person Party / Non-Party Nature of Interest Robert Half Internationaltne. [xX]. ] Respondent Robert Half of Catifornia,Inc. rx]. ] Respondent Robert Half Incorporated [ xX} [ ] Respondent Robert Half Corporation d/b/a RHC [IX] ft] Respondent EF Jf J fc ] f J Plt [ If ] rT Ff ] [ IC ] Submitted by: Judith M, Kline A pAAR Im. Ex TABLE OF CONTENTS STATEMENTOF POSITION 00... cccsceceseeeeseseseserscessesensseseeeseetsensseseseeees 1 CERTIFICATE OF WORD COUNT1...cececesses scereeseensesssecseesenesteeeees 5 -j- TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases Page Brinker Rest. Corp. v. Superior Court, 53 Cal. 4th 1004 (2012)occceecseeeseeeseeesseesseteeeesceeseaeeeseeeaeeeseeeeeas 2 Dunk v. Ford Motor Co., 48 Cal. App. 4th 1794 (1996) oo... ceeccsscessessecssesseseessesseesssesseesssseseeesees 1 Harris v. Superior Court, 53 Cal. 4th 170 (2011) wo. eeeeccesessecsecseessneceseeseeesaeeceneeseecenesseceeeenseseaes 2 Keller v. Tuesday Morning, Inc., 179 Cal. App. 4th 1389 (2009) ooo. cecccseesseeeeseessesecesseeseteesensenseeseeees 2 Laffitte v. Robert HalfInt'l, Inc., 231 Cal. App. 4th 860 (2014) oo.ceceecccsceeteetseseseeaceaeeeeseeessenseeesseed In re Vitamin Cases, 110 Cal. App. 4th 1041 (2003) oo. eeessecsseesseeeteeceeessseeeseesseseeeeseeenes 1 Mora v. Big Lots Stores, Inc., 194 Cal. App. 4th 496 (2011) oo.eesecsssscsseesssncessseeceseeesaseessssesseeeees 2 Soderstedt v. CBIZ S. Cal., LLC, 197 Cal. App. 4th 133 (2011) wo... eceeseesseessesseeeeseesseeeseeessesssesssessees 2 -Ii- STATEMENT OF POSITION The attorneys’ fee at issue here does not directly concern the respondent/defendant Robert Half entities. Section III.C.2 of the settlement agreement here provides that any difference between the maximum fee allowable ($6,333,333.33) and the fee actually awardedreverts to the settlement class members. (2 RA 436-37.) No matter how this case is decided, Robert Half recoups nothing, and the substantive terms of the settlement with respect to Robert Halfremain unchanged. (2 RA 446-48 (sections I[I.G.7.c and III.G.9).)' Robert Half therefore will not address the appellant/objector’s contentions about the proper fee to class counsel. Robert Half nevertheless offers this short statement to make two points. First, Robert Half suggests that the court of appeal’s order should be affirmed to bring this lawsuit to closure. This case wasfiled on September 10, 2004, and (although stayed for part of the time since then)it approachesits 11-year anniversary. Throughout more than a decade of highly contestedlitigation, plaintiffs advanced their arguments, Robert Half ' The settlement’s terms thus reinforce normal principles of law: Ifa class- action fee awardis reversed, that reversal normally leaves intact the underlying settlementitself. See, e.g., Dunk v. Ford Motor Co., 48 Cal. App.4th 1794, 1810 (1996) (reversing the fee and remanding onthe sole issue of fees); In re Vitamin Cases, 110 Cal. App. 4th 1041, 1061 (2003) (remanding,limited to the issue of fees, so that the trial court could better explain its reasoning in setting fees). -|- responded and advancedits arguments, and the controlling legal principles evolvedin several key Supreme Court and appellate cases.” Eventually Robert Half (still believing firmly that it would prevail at trial and through any appeal), thought that the lawsuit should be resolvedso it could bring finality to the issues surroundingthe litigation and concentrate fully onits core business. The settlement eventually was struck (after two failed mediations, as explained below). This appeal unfortunately prolongs a contentious dispute still more. Second, Robert Half must and does respond to appellant/objector’s insinuation that the settlement was collusive. Nothing is further from the truth. The parties conducted one mediation before noted mediator Jeff Krivis on August 10, 2010. It failed. (1 RA 16, 25, 38;2 RA 412, 420; 3 RA 670, 674-75.) The parties later convened a second ? See, e.g., Harris v. Superior Court, 53 Cal. 4th 170, 186-87 (2011) (employees’ exempt status dependson their actual duties, not their generic “role”); Brinker Rest. Corp. v. Superior Court, 53 Cal. 4th 1004, 1023-24 (2012) (“Whenevidence or legal issues germaneto the certification question bear as well on aspects of the merits, a court may properly evaluate them.”); see also Mora v. Big Lots Stores, Inc., 194 Cal. App. 4th 496, 508 (2011) (affirming denial of certification; “[W]ide store-to-store variation exists in the types of work performed and amountsoftime per workweek spent by managers on different activities ....”); Soderstedt v. CBIZ S. Cal., LLC, 197 Cal. App. 4th 133, 151-52 (2011) (affirming denial of certification; “[T]he availability of the administrative exemption defense would involve individualized inquiries in view of the evidence showing the Associates’ and Senior Associates’ different tasks and responsibilities.”); Keller v. Tuesday Morning, Inc., 179 Cal. App. 4th 1389, 1396 (2009) (affirming decertification: “[T]he time spent in a managerial duty is an individual inquiry.”). mediation before another noted mediator, David Rotman, on June 18, 2012. It failed, too. (1 RA 17, 25, 38; 2 RA 413, 420; 3 RA 670, 674-75.) Mediator Rotmanpersisted in the days that followed, however, and on July 5, 2012, he finally produced an agreement both parties accepted. (See 1 RA 17, 25; 2 RA 413, 420.) Thetrial court rejected appellant/objector’s contention of collusion (see RT 35, 62, 63; 3 RA 726), the court of appeal found no evidence of collusion (see Laffitte v. Robert HalfInt’l, Inc., 231 Cal. App. 4th 860, 882 (2014)), and more than substantial evidence supports that finding. The history shows — and undersigned counsel unequivocally represents to this Court — that the settlement here was reached entirely at arm’s length and (contrary to any assertion otherwise) without any diminished contentiousness between the parties. Robert Half therefore suggests that the settlement be approved. Respectfully submitted, DATED: August 26, 2015 PAUL HASTINGS LLP By: arte C UW heer fae M.Kirby C. Wilcox Attorneys for Defendants and Respondents ROBERT HALF INTERNATIONAL INC.; ROBERT HALF OF CALIFORNIA, INC.; ROBERT HALF INCORPORATED; and ROBERT HALF CORPORATION CERTIFICATE OF WORD COUNT In accordance with California Rule of Court 8.504(d)(1), counsel for Respondents and Defendants hereby certify that the BRIEF OF RESPONDENTS ROBERT HALF INTERNATIONALINC, AND AFFILIATESis proportionately spaced, uses Times New Roman 13-point typeface, and contains 739 words, including footnotes but excluding the Table of Authorities and this Certificate, as determined by the Paul Hastings LLP word processing system usedto prepare this brief. Respectfully submitted, DATED: August 26, 2015 PAUL HASTINGS LLP By: yrrdok In hang /Pwe Judith M. Kline CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I am employedin the City of San Francisco and County of San Francisco, State of California. I am over the age of 18, and not a party to the within action. My business address is 55 SecondStreet, 24th Floor, San Francisco, California 94105. On August 26, 2015, I served the foregoing document(s) described as: BRIEF OF RESPONDENTS ROBERT HALF INTERNATIONALINC. AND AFFILIATES on the interested parties by placing a true and correct copy thereof in a sealed envelope(s) addressed as follows: Kevin T. Barnes, Esq. Attorneys for Gregg Lander, Esq. Plaintiffs/Respondents Law Offices of Kevin T. Barnes 5670 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1460 Los Angeles, CA 90036-5664 Tel.: (323) 549-9100 Fax: (323) 549-0101 Email: Barnes@kbarnes.com Joseph Antonelli, Esq. Attorneys for Janelle Carney, Esq. Plaintiffs/Respondents Law Office of Joseph Antonelli 14758 Pipeline Avenue, Suite E Chino Hills, CA 91709-6025 Tel: (909) 393-0223 Fax: (909) 393-0471 Email: JAntonelli@antonellilaw.com Barry M. Appell, Esq. Attorneys for MikaM.Hilaire, Esq. Plaintiffs/Respondents Appell, Hilaire Benardo LLP 15233 Ventura Blvd., Suite 420 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Tel: (818) 788-2300 Fax: (818) 788-2464 Email: Mika@ahblegal.com Lawrence W. Schonbrun, Esq. Attorneys for Appellant and Law Office of Lawrence W. Objector David Brennan Schonbrun 86 Eucalyptus Road Berkeley, CA 94705 Tel.: (510) 547-8070 Fax: (510) 923-0627 Email: Lschon@inreach.com Myron Moskovitz, Esq. Co-Counsel for Appellant and Attorney at Law Objector David Brennan 90 Crocker Avenue Piedmont, CA 94611 Tel: (510) 384-0354 Email: myronmoskovitz@gmail.com Supreme Court of California Supreme Court 350 McAllister Street San Francisco, CA 94102-4797 Honorable Mary H.Strobel Superior Court Judge Los Angeles Superior Court Department 32 111 North Hill Street Los Angeles, CA 90012-3014 Clerk, Court of Appeal Court of Appeal Second Appellate District 300 South Spring Street Second Floor, North Tower Los Angeles, CA 90013 Tel: (213) 830-7000 Appellate Coordinator Service pursuant to CAL. BUS. & Office of the Attorney General PROF, CODE § 17209 (Complaint Consumer Law Section alleges violation of CAL. Bus. & 300 S. Spring Street PROF. CODE §§ 17200 et seq.) Los Angeles, CA 90013-1230 District Attorney’s Office Service pursuant to CAL. BUS. & County of Los Angeles PROF. CODE § 17209 (Complaint 210 West Temple Street, 18th Floor alleges violation of CAL. BUS. & Los Angeles, CA 90012-3210 PROF. CODE §§ 17200 ef. seq.) The envelope wasthen sealed. I am readily familiar with the firm’s practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice the sealed envelope would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid in the ordinary course of business. I declare under penalty of perjury under the lawsofthe State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. J also declare that I am employed in the office of a memberofthe bar of this court at whose direction the service was made. Executed on August 26, 2015, at San Francisco, California. 1 \ ®%ela Gonzatez LEGAL_US_W # 82516306.6