Larner v. Los Angeles Doctors Hosp. Associates, LP, 168 Cal. App. 4th 1291 (2008)
Josephine Larner, a nurse, sued her former employer, a hospital, for allegedly unpaid overtime. Larner brought the action on behalf of herself and all current and former nonexempt workers employed by defendants who failed to receive required premium overtime wages for the previous four years. The hospital successfully moved for summary adjudication of Larner’s claim after which she filed an amended complaint. The trial court subsequently denied Larner’s motion to certify two separate classes – one for improper calculation of overtime rates and one for failure to keep accurate and complete wage records – on the grounds that the motion was unduly tardy, Larner’s claims were not typical of those of the proposed classes and the class definitions were overbroad. The parties then reached a settlement of Larner’s individual claims two days before the trial date, but they agreed Larner could reserve her right to seek appellate review of the trial court’s orders granting summary adjudication to the hospital and denying class certification. The Court of Appeal held that the settlement between the parties rendered Larner’s appeal moot. Cf. United Steel Workers, AFL-CIO v. Shell Oil Co., 2008 WL 5143873 (9th Cir. 2008) (rule requiring unanimous consent to removal of multi-defendant action is inapplicable under the Class Action Fairness Act).