Hamidi et al v. Service Employees International Union Local 1000 et al

Filing 55

STIPULATION and ORDER to Amend Class Definition signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 6/5/15. (Kastilahn, A)

1 JEFFREY B. DEMAIN (SBN 126715)
EVE H. CERVANTEZ (SBN 164709)
2 P. CASEY PITTS (SBN 262463)
Altshuler Berzon LLP
3 177 Post Street, Suite 300
San Francisco, California 94108
4 Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
5 [e-mail]
[e-mail]
6 [e-mail]
7 YORK J. CHANG (SBN 220415)
ANNE M. GIESE (SBN 143934)
8 SEIU Local 1000
1808 14th Street
9 Sacramento, California 95811
Telephone: [phone]
10 Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
11 [e-mail]
12 Attorneys for Defendant
Service Employees International Union, Local 1000
13
14

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16
17

)
KOUROSH KENNETH HAMIDI, et al., AND )
18 THE CLASS THEY SEEK TO REPRESENT )
)
19
Plaintiffs,
)
)
20
v.
)
)
21 SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL )
UNION, LOCAL 1000, et al.;
)
22
)
Defendants.
)
23
)

No. 2:14-cv-00319-WBS-KJN
STIPULATED REQUEST TO AMEND
CLASS DEFINITION; PROPOSED ORDER
THEREON
Hearing Date:
Time:
Courtroom:
Judge:

24
25
26
27
28
29 Stipulated Request to Amend Class Definition; Proposed Order Thereon
30

Hamidi, et al. v. SEIU Local 1000, et al., Case No. 2:14-cv-00319-WBS-KJN

N/A
N/A
N/A
Hon. William B. Shubb

1

TO THE COURT:

2

The parties to the above-captioned case hereby submit the following stipulated request to

3 amend the class definition set forth in the Court’s May 22, 2015 Memorandum and Order Re: Motion
4 for Class Certification and Appointment of Class Counsel, Docket No. 53:
5

1.

The Court issued its Memorandum and Order Re: Motion for Class Certification and

6 Appointment of Class Counsel (“Memorandum”), Docket No. 53, on May 22, 2015.
7

2.

The Memorandum defines the certified class as follows, in relevant part: “all former,

8 current and future State of California employees employed in Bargaining Units 1, 3, 4, 11, 14, 15, 17,
9 20, and 21 who are, have been, or will be represented exclusively for purposes of collective bargaining
10 by Local 1000, from June 2013 onward . . . .” Memorandum at 20:16-18.
11

3.

The Memorandum also states, “The court retains the power to modify this definition,

12 and it will be the duty of the parties’ counsel to call to the court’s attention any other necessary
13 adjustments.” Id. at 5:6-8.
14

4.

It appears from the definitions of the subclasses set forth in the Memorandum that the

15 Court intended to limit the class to non-members of Local 1000 who were subject to a provision
16 requiring that they have deducted from their wages agency fees as a condition of continued public
17 employment. See Memorandum at 20:19 – 21:2. But the general class definition does not expressly
18 exclude union members. Therefore, the parties, through their undersigned counsel, hereby respectfully
19 request the Court to amend the class definition so as to clarify that the class is limited to state
20 employees who, at any time during the class period, were represented by Local 1000 but were not
21 members of Local 1000, and had agency fees deducted from their wages. (Thus, state employees who
22 were represented by Local 1000 during the class period, but were members of Local 1000 for part of
23 that time and non-members of Local 1000 for part of that time, are included in the class but only have
24 damage claims for the period of time during which they were represented by Local 1000 but were not
25 members of Local 1000.) The parties respectfully request that the Court do so by amending the
26 Memorandum as follows:
27
28

A.

Amending the class definition quoted above (Memorandum at 20:16-18) to add
the following underlined language: “all former, current and future State of

Stipulated Request to Amend Class Definition; Proposed Order Thereon

29 Hamidi, et al. v. SEIU Local 1000, et al., Case No. 2:14-cv-00319-WBS-KJN
30

1

1

California employees employed in Bargaining Units 1, 3, 4, 11, 14, 15, 17, 20,

2

and 21 who are, have been, or will be represented exclusively for purposes of

3

collective bargaining by Local 1000 from June 2013 onward, but for some or all

4

of that period were not members of Local 1000, . . . .”

5

B.

Adding a new sentence to the Memorandum at 21:3, immediately following the

6

class definition, stating as follows: “State employees who were represented by

7

Local 1000 during the class period, but were members of Local 1000 for part of

8

that time and non-members of Local 1000 for part of that time, are included in

9

the class but only have claims for the period or periods during which they were
represented by Local 1000 but were not members of Local 1000.”

10
11

5.

The foregoing request is so stipulated and agreed between the parties to the above-

12 captioned action, by among their undersigned counsel.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

Dated: June 5, 2015.

Respectfully submitted,
JEFFREY B. DEMAIN
EVE H. CERVANTEZ
P. CASEY PITTS
Altshuler Berzon LLP
YORK J. CHANG
ANNE M. GIESE
SEIU Local 1000
By:

/s/ Jeffrey B. Demain
Jeffrey B. Demain

Attorneys for Defendant Service Employees
International Union, Local 1000
KAMALA D. HARRIS
Attorney General of California
MARK R. BECKINGTON
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
KIM L. NGUYEN
Deputy Attorney General
State Bar No. 209524
300 South Spring Street, Suite 1702
Los Angeles, CA 90013
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
By:

/s/Kim Nguyen (as authorized on June 4, 2015)

Stipulated Request to Amend Class Definition; Proposed Order Thereon
Hamidi, et al. v. SEIU Local 1000, et al., Case No. 2:14-cv-00319-WBS-KJN

2

Kim Nguyen

1

Attorneys for Defendant John Chiang,
Controller of the State of California

2
3

W. JAMES YOUNG, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice)
c/o National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, Inc.
8001 Braddock Road, Suite 600
Springfield, Virginia 22160
[phone]

4
5
6

STEVEN R. BURLINGHAM, Esq.
California Bar No. 88544
Gary, Till & Burlingham
5330 Madison Avenue, Suite F
Sacramento, California 95841
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

7
8
9
10

By:

11

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Class They Represent

12
13
14

/s/W. James Young (as authorized on June 5, 2015)
W. James Young

ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.

15
16

Dated: June 5, 2015

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Stipulated Request to Amend Class Definition; Proposed Order Thereon

29 Hamidi, et al. v. SEIU Local 1000, et al., Case No. 2:14-cv-00319-WBS-KJN
30

3