Effective, Experienced, Exceptional.

Class Actions

Subscribe to California Appellate Tracker

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Appellate Tracker Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

Trial court properly declined to certify a class in putative wage and hour class action brought by property inspectors because even though common questions predominated, the plaintiffs' proposed trial plan of proving liability by means of an expert's testimony based on a double-blind survey he conducted of a random sample of class members was unmanageable, inadequate, and unfair. Read More

Remand to state court based on the local controversy exception to jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act was proper in this putative class action against the Golden Gate Transportation District, the Bay Area Toll Authority and Conduent, the private entity that collects bridge tolls under contract with the other two defendants, for violating California's privacy laws by sharing personal… Read More

Putative class representatives were not entitled to intervene in a parallel class action to object to settlement as they could preserve their rights by opting out or by objecting to the settlement and moving to vacate judgment approving the settlement. Read More

Defendant’s motion to dismiss class action for plaintiff’s failure to bring to trial within five years should have been granted; trial court miscalculated the relevant time period when it failed to include a 43-day period during which the court stayed the filing of pleadings and the service of discovery requests while the parties met and conferred on a case management plan. Read More

In calculating value of class action coupon settlement for purposes of awarding attorney fees, only the value of the coupon credits actually used by class members should have been counted; the district court erred by performing its fee calculation based on the full value of all the credits available to class members.  Read More

In calculating value of class action coupon settlement for purposes of awarding attorney fees, only the value of the coupon credits actually used by class members should have been counted; the district court erred by performing its fee calculation based on the full value of all the credits available to class members.  Read More

A uniform policy alone does not establish the predominance of common issues if it is not a means of establishing class-wide liability; so, here, the employer could defeat class certification with evidence that many of its crews did not follow its uniform break policy. Read More

1 2 3 6