California Employment Law Update

Tag Archives: removal

Employer Met Its Burden Of Proving At Least $5 Million Amount In Controversy For CAFA Removal

LaCross v. Knight Transp. Inc., 775 F.3d 1200 (9th Cir. 2015) In this putative class action, plaintiffs alleged that Knight Transportation had misclassified them as independent contractors when in fact they were employees who were not reimbursed their lease-related and fuel costs as required by Labor Code § 2802. Knight removed the case from state … Continue Reading

PAGA Action Should Have Been Remanded To State Court

Baumann v. Chase Inv. Servs., 2014 WL 983587 (9th Cir. 2014) Joseph Baumann sued his employer, Chase Investment Services Corporation, under the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”), alleging claims for unpaid overtime, meal breaks and rest periods and timely expense reimbursements. Baumann further alleged his potential share of any recovery and attorney’s fees would be … Continue Reading

Ninth Circuit Clarifies CAFA Removal Requirements

In its recent per curiam opinion in Rea v. Michaels Stores, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit clarified rules and procedures relevant to defendants seeking to remove cases to federal court. In Rea, the plaintiffs filed a class action alleging that Michaels improperly classified California store managers as exempt from overtime. Michaels removed … Continue Reading

Defendant That Removes Action To Federal Court Bears Burden Of Proof Regarding Damages

Guglielmino v. McKee Foods Corp., 506 F.3d 696 (9th Cir. 2007) Plaintiffs sued McKee Foods in this putative class action in state court, alleging violation of the California Labor Code, fraud, breach of contract and related claims. McKee timely removed the action to federal court and asserted that even though plaintiffs affirmatively alleged that the damages … Continue Reading

Employer In Class Action Removed To Federal Court Must Prove Amount In Controversy With “Legal Certainty”

Lowdermilk v. United States Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 2007 WL 678221 (9th Cir. Mar. 2, 2007) Plaintiffs in this class action sought unpaid wages and penalties under Oregon state law as well as costs and attorneys’ fees for a total amount of alleged damages that did not exceed $5 million. The Bank removed the action to … Continue Reading
LexBlog

This website uses third party cookies, over which we have no control. To deactivate the use of third party advertising cookies, you should alter the settings in your browser.

OK