Bank of New York Mellon v. City of Richmond, California et al
REPLY (re 55 MOTION for Sanctions ) filed byCity of Richmond, California, Gordian Sword LLC, Mortgage Resolution Partners L.L.C., Richmond City Council. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Declaration of Stacey Leyton, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit D, # 6 Exhibit E, # 7 Exhibit F)(Leyton, Stacey) (Filed on 12/20/2013)
not prohibit workers from pursuing statutory claims on a classwide or collective basis.
* Bay Area Laundry Workers v. Ferbar (Supreme Court): Established longer statute of limitations for
suits against employers who withdraw from multi-employer pension plans.
* Burlington Northern Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. Int=l Bhd. of Teamsters Local 174: Obtained a unanimous
en banc court of appeals decision overturning prior decisions that had severely weakened the protection
afforded by the Norris-LaGuardia Act to union economic action.
* Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Svcs.: Obtained a ruling from the California Supreme
Court that employers cannot require their employees, as a condition of employment, to resolve
employment claims through arbitration, where the arbitration agreement does not provide for specific
* Washington Service Contractors Coalition v. District of Columbia: Successfully defended against a
federal preemption challenge a local displaced worker ordinance that requires new service contractors
to retain the employees of their predecessors.
* Does I Thru XXIII v. Advanced Textile Corp.: Established the right of workers to sue under
fictitious names and withhold their identities from their employers, where they reasonably fear that
disclosure of their identities will result in severe retaliation.
* Granite Rock Co. v. Int=l Bhd. of Teamsters (Supreme Court): Obtained U.S. Supreme Court
decision rejecting an employer=s unprecedented attempt to expand Section 301 of the LMRA to include
tort theories for interference with contract by international union.
* Passantino v. Johnson & Johnson Consumer Products, Inc.: Successfully defended on appeal a
multi-million dollar jury award in an employment discrimination action under federal and state law.
* Veliz v. Cintas Corp.: Obtained a $22.75 million settlement of class actions and individual cases
pending in the Ninth Circuit, the Northern District of California, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict
Litigation, and AAA arbitration, each of which challenges a nationwide industrial laundry company=s
policy of classifying its drivers as exempt from overtime requirements of federal and state
* Hawaii State Teachers Assn./United Public Workers v. Lingle: Enjoined the Governor of Hawaii
from unilaterally implementing unpaid furloughs for all state employees of three days per month on the
ground that unilateral implementation violated the state constitutional right to collective bargaining.
* SEIU-UHW v. Fresno County IHSS Public Authority: Obtained an injunction requiring Fresno
County to maintain the wage and benefit rates paid to providers of in-home support services pending
arbitration of the union's grievance regarding the wage and benefit reduction.
* Narayan v. EGL: Obtained a Ninth Circuit reversal of a district court's grant of summary judgment
to an employer of delivery truck drivers, on the grounds that the district court had improperly applied
Texas law to California drivers' statutory wage and hour claims and incorrect concluded that the drivers
were independent contractors rather than employees.
* Does I et al. v. The Gap, Inc., et al.: Negotiated $20 million settlement and innovative workplace
monitoring program in anti-sweatshop class action on behalf of 30,000 Chinese and other foreign
workers against Saipan garment factories and retailers for alleged violations of RICO, Alien Tort
Claims Act, FLSA, and federal common law.
* Satchell v. FedEx Express: Obtained a consent decree providing $55 million in monetary relief to
two classes of African American and Latino employees of FedEx Express, as well as comprehensive
injunctive relief against discriminatory employment practices, including reducing managerial discretion
in promotions, compensation and discipline, and prohibiting the use of a promotion test that had an
adverse impact on minority employees.
* Bright v. 99 Cent Only Stores, Inc./ Home Depot v. Superior Ct. : Obtained Court of Appeal rulings
that California workers have private right of action for civil penalties against employers who violate
minimum labor conditions standards guaranteed by IWC Wage Orders.
* Pulaski v. Calif. Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board: Successfully defended the
nation=s first safety standard on ergonomics against an industry challenge, and invalidated exemptions
that would have prevented that standard from applying to most California workplaces.
* SkyWest Pilots ALPA Organizing Committee v. SkyWest Airlines, Inc.: Obtained a temporary
restraining order and a preliminary injunction prohibiting an airline from interfering with its pilots=
rights to organize and to free expression under the Railway Labor Act.
* UFCW Local 751 v. Brown Shoe Group, Inc. (Supreme Court): Established union standing to sue
employers that violate the WARN Act=s statutory notice requirements.
* State Building & Constr. Trades v. Aubry: Struck down, as a usurpation of legislative authority,
administrative regulations that would have lowered by 20 percent the prevailing wage rate paid to
construction workers on public projects.
* Bell v. Farmers Ins. Exchange (Bell III): Obtained appellate decision upholding the largest overtime
pay jury verdict in history, in class action on behalf of insurance company claims representatives who
were misclassified as exempt under California=s wage and hour law, and subsequently negotiated a
settlement in excess of $200 million for class members.
* The Hess Collection Winery v. California Agricultural Relations Bd.: Successfully defended against
constitutional challenge a California statute providing for the binding resolution of disputes between
agricultural employers and their union-represented employees arising from their failure to agree on an
initial labor contract, thereby guaranteeing that agricultural workers will obtain an initial contract.
* Employee Staffing Services, Inc. v. Aubry: Defeated an employee-leasing company=s ERISA
preemption challenge to California=s workers= compensation laws.
* NLRB v. Town & Country Electric, Inc. (Supreme Court): Protected paid union organizers from
discriminatory discharge or refusal to hire under the NLRA.
* Long Beach City Employees v. City of Long Beach: Overturned on state constitutional grounds a
city policy requiring public employees to submit to polygraph examinations.
* Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corp.: Obtained a ruling that a national aluminum manufacturer
violated the NLRA by unlawfully locking out 3,000 of its employees and must pay them approximately
$175 million in back wages B the highest backpay award in the history of the NLRA.
* Associated Builders and Contractors v. Nunn; ACTA v. Smith: Defeated federal court preemption
challenges to a regulation raising the minimum wage rates for California apprentices.
* Amaral v. Cintas Corp.: Won $1.6 million summary judgment in a class action challenging a
nationwide laundry company=s systematic underpayment of its workers, defeating state law preemption
and federal due process challenges to a local living wage ordinance.
* Capers v. Nunn: Obtained decision upholding a California Apprenticeship Council ruling that
precluded non-union apprenticeship program from operating outside its approved geographic area.
* Rosenburg v. Int=l Business Machines Corp.: Obtained a $65 million settlement in a class action
brought on behalf of IBM information technology specialists for failure to pay overtime compensation.
* Air Line Pilots Ass=n, Int=l v. Emery Worldwide Airlines, Inc.: Obtained an eight-figure settlement
of breach of contract claim on behalf of airline pilots who were permanently furloughed when their
employer ceased flight operations.
* Frazier v. Citicorp Investment Services: Obtained class action settlement for full backpay on behalf
of securities brokers who alleged that their employer violated California and New York law by
enforcing a corporate fine-based disciplinary policy.
* Aguiar v. Superior Court (Cintas Corp.): After two successful appeals, obtained full back pay plus
interest and civil penalties in settlement on behalf of class of laundry workers who were not paid the
wages required by L.A.'s Living Wage Ordinance.
* In re Farmers Ins. Exchange Claims Representative's Overtime Pay Litigation: Obtains an $8
million settlement of claims challenging an insurance company's treatment of its claims representatives
as exempt "administrators."
* Cremin v. Merrill Lynch: Settled nationwide sex discrimination class action on behalf of women
brokers, resulting in establishment of novel claims procedure and agreement by brokerage firm no
longer to compel any employees to arbitrate statutory discrimination claims.
* Curtis-Bauer v. Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc.: Obtained a $16 million class-action settlement for
African-American and Latino financial advisors and financial advisor trainees that will (among other
non-monetary relief) require Morgan Stanley to change its account distribution procedures to
de-emphasize historical factors that have an adverse impact on minorities, to engage in active
recruitment of minority financial advisors, and to tie manager compensation to diversification efforts.
* Akau v. Tel-A-Com Hawaii: Upheld, against an employer=s ERISA preemption challenge, Hawaii=s
Dislocated Workers Act, which provided supplemental unemployment compensation benefits to
workers adversely affected by plant closings.
* Reigh v. Calif. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Bd.: Obtained the right to unemployment
compensation for workers in non-safety-sensitive jobs who were discharged after refusing to take, or
failing, a random drug test.
* AFL-CIO v. Employment Development Department: Compelled California to continue to pay
unemployment compensation benefits to hundreds of thousands of claimants per year pending
evidentiary hearings on their continued eligibility.
* Gerlach v. Wells Fargo & Co.: Obtained a $12.8 million settlement in a class action brought against
Wells Fargo for misclassifying employees given the title Abusiness consultants@ as exempt from
* Martens v. Smith Barney: Settled a nationwide sex discrimination class action on behalf of women
brokerage employees, resulting in a novel claims procedure allowing for potentially tens of millions of
dollars in damages.
* California Hospital Ass=n v. Henning: Overcame a federal statutory challenge to a California law
requiring payment of accrued vacation pay to workers upon cessation of employment.
* United Public Workers v. Yogi: Invalidated a state public employee wage freeze that conflicted with
the state constitutional right to organize for the purpose of collective bargaining.
* St. Thomas - St. John Hotel & Tourism Ass=n v. Gov=t of the U.S. Virgin Islands: Defeated an
NLRA preemption challenge to a Virgin Islands statute that protects employees from termination
* Simo v. Union of Needletrades, Industrial & Textile Employees : Successfully defended on federal
appeal a labor union=s use of the Agarment industry proviso@ to ' 8(e) of the NLRA.
* Adcock v. United Auto Workers; Patterson v. Heartland Industrial Partners, LLP: Obtained
decisions from the Fourth Circuit (Adcock) and the Northern District of Ohio (Patterson) holding that
an agreement under which an employer agrees to remain neutral in union organizing campaigns in
return for the union=s agreement to limitations on such campaigns does not violate Section 302 of the
Taft-Hartley Act or RICO.
* Heartland Industrial Partners, LLP and the United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO
Obtained an NLRB decision upholding a neutrality and card-check organizing agreement under Section
8(e) of the NLRA.
* Pearson Dental Supplies v. Superior Court: Obtained a California Supreme Court ruling that
requires heightened judicial review of an arbitration award, issued pursuant to a mandatory arbitration
agreement, that is challenged on the ground that the arbitrator's legal error deprived the claimant of a
hearing on the merits of a fundamental statutory or common law claim.
* Danielli v. Int=l Business Machines Corp.: Obtained a $7.5 million common fund settlement in a
class action brought on behalf of IBM employees for IBM=s failure to pay overtime compensation.
* Vendachalam v. Tata International: Obtained a unanimous decision from the Ninth Circuit that Tata
International, India's largest conglomerate, could not force its overseas workers to arbitrate employment
disputes before Tata's hand-picked arbitrators in Mumbai.
* SEIU Local 24/7 v. Professional Technical Security Services, Inc.: Obtained settlement under state
wage and hour laws providing payments to hundreds of low-wage workers as reimbursement for
uniform cleaning expenses.
* Int=l Longshore & Warehouse Union, Local 142 v. Brewer: Obtained a settlement on behalf of a
class of retirees from sugar and pineapple plantations compensating them for the company=s termination
of their medical plans.
* Vega v. Contract Cleaning Maintenance, Inc.: Obtained class action settlements on behalf of
low-wage janitors and maintenance workers who were misclassified as independent contractors,
providing double overtime, reimbursement of allegedly unlawful paycheck deductions and statutory
* Wynne v. McCormick & Schmick=s Seafood Restaurants, Inc.: Obtained a consent decree against a
restaurant chain requiring it to implement a series of measures to increase the representation of
African-American employees in Afront of the house,@ i.e., server, bartender and host/hostess, positions.
* Higazi v. Cadence Design Systems, Inc.: Obtained a $7.664 million class-action settlement for
information technology workers who were misclassified as exempt employees and denied overtime and
meal and rest breaks in violation of federal and California law.
* In re the Pep Boys Overtime Actions: Obtained a $6 million class-action settlement compensating
employees of a national automobile parts and service retailer, who were denied meal and rest breaks
and required to work Aoff the clock@ without pay.
* Adams v. Inter-Con Security Systems, Inc.: Obtained a $4 million settlement compensating private
security guards who were required to work Aoff the clock@ without pay and requiring the company to
pay its employees in the future for the time they spend in mandatory training sessions and pre-shift
* Martin v. New United Motor Mfg., Inc.: Obtained a $4.65 million settlement from an automobile
manufacturing plant for failure to compensate its employees for donning and doffing protective gear, in
violation of federal and state law.
* Southern California Edison Co. v. Public Utilities Comm=n: Obtained decision upholding the
authority of the Public Utilities Commission to order utilities to require the payment of prevailing
wages to construction workers on energy utility construction projects.
* AFL-CIO v. Marshall: Required payment of an additional 26 weeks of extended unemployment
compensation benefits, worth billions of dollars, to unemployed workers nationwide.
* IBEW v. Eichleay: Enforced a multi-million dollar arbitration award against an employer that tried
to evade its contract obligations through a non-union alter ego.
* Local 1564 v. City of Clovis: Struck down a local Aright to work@ law enacted by a New Mexico
* Patel v. Sugen: Obtained a nearly $2 million settlement in a class action challenge to a
pharmaceutical company=s refusal to pay contractually-mandated severance pay and bonuses to
employees upon sale of the company, representing complete recovery of all monies owed plus ten
* Figueroa v. Guess?, Inc.: Obtained a million dollar settlement of a wage and overtime class action
on behalf of Los Angeles garment workers.
* EQR/Legacy Partners: Obtained settlement in administrative action of $1.6 million in back wages to
construction workers who were not paid the prevailing wage required on public works projects.
*Californians for Safe and Competitive Dump Truck Transportation v. Mendonca : Defeated an
industry challenge to the application of California=s prevailing wage law to motor carriers after the
enactment of trucking deregulation.
* Gerke v. Waterhouse Securities: Obtained a $3.3 million overtime settlement on behalf of 1,800
employees of a discount brokerage firm who were not paid for half-hour lunch periods during which
they were expected to work.
* Fry v. Air Line Pilots Ass=n: Defeated an attempt to hold a union liable under RICO and state tort
law for ostracism allegedly directed against strikebreakers.
* IBEW Locals 595 and 6 v. LIS Electric: Won a private attorney general action, after a multi-week
trial, against a construction contractor and its president for failing to pay workers prevailing wages on
public works projects.
* International Longshore and Warehouse Union Local 142 v. Hawaiian Waikiki Beach Hotel:
Obtained an order requiring the corporate parent of a hotel in receivership to arbitrate claims for
millions of dollars in accrued vacation and severance pay owed to the hotel=s employees.
* SEIU v. County of San Bernardino: Obtained an injunction prohibiting one of the nation=s largest
counties from depriving its employees of their right to discuss union issues at work.
* Retlaw Broadcasting Co. v. NLRB: Successfully defended on appeal the NLRB=s decision that an
employer unlawfully implemented a contract proposal allowing it to bypass the union and negotiate
directly with its individual employees.
* CPS Chem. Co. v. NLRB: Confirmed an employer=s continuing duty to bargain with the local union
that represents its employees, notwithstanding that union=s affiliation with a national union.
* Bishop v. Air Line Pilots Ass=n: Defeated a challenge to a nationwide collective bargaining
agreement that had been approved by a majority of the bargaining unit employees in a secret ballot
* San Joaquin Regional Transit Dist.: Obtained an arbitration award stopping a transit district from
contracting out numerous jobs held by union-represented workers.
* Driscoll v. Oracle: Negotiated $12.7 million settlement in nationwide overtime case under FLSA
and state law on behalf of internet sales representatives.
* UAW Local 2244 and New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc.: Obtained an arbitration award in
excess of a million dollars for violation of a contractual provision requiring an employer to pay wage
premiums to employees who start their shifts before 6:00 a.m.
* ATU Local 1292 and Alameda County Transit District: Obtained an arbitration award prohibiting a
public transit district from using a lease arrangement to evade contractual restrictions on outsourcing
bargaining unit jobs.
* California Federation of Interpreters v. Region 1 Court Interpreter Employment Relations
Committee; California Federation of Interpreters v. Region 2 Court Interpreter Employment Relations
Committee; California Federation of Interpreters v. Region 4 Court: Obtained arbitration awards
requiring Superior Courts to pay mileage compensation to court interpreters and holding that the Courts
acted illegally by giving interpreting assignments to independent contractors.
* New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc. and United Auto Workers, Local 2244 : Successfully
challenged in arbitration an employer=s policy of terminating sick leave benefits for ill or injured
employees, providing relief to nearly one hundred employees.
* Int=l Bhd. of Electrical Workers Local 551 v. WSB Electric: Enjoined a contractor and its officers
from continuing to commit unfair business practices by underpaying workers on public works projects,
leading to the debarment of the contractor from bidding on public works projects for three years.
* Associated Builders and Contractors: Obtained an NLRB decision that an association of non-union
construction contractors violated the NLRA by filing and prosecuting a lawsuit challenging a union
program to recapture jobs for union workers.
* McCabe Hamilton & Renny Co., Ltd. v. Int=l Longshore & Warehouse Union, Local 142: Obtained,
and secured against federal court challenge, a $355,000 arbitration award for a longshore worker who
was assaulted, permanently disabled, and forced to spend two years in a witness protection program due
to the employer=s breach of a contractual duty to provide a safe workplace.
* Advocate Health Care Network v. Service Employees Int=l Union: Obtained dismissal of
defamation, commercial disparagement, unfair trade practices, and maintenance claims arising from
union=s support for community campaign to change hospital chain=s practice of overcharging uninsured
* In re Opinion of Bill Lockyer, Attorney General (State Allocation Board): Obtained interpretation
from the California Attorney General requiring school districts to utilize competitive bidding laws to
award public school construction projects, thereby insuring that union contractors have an opportunity
to bid on such work.
* In re Santa Ana Transit Village: Obtained a California administrative ruling that a transfer of
property for a redevelopment project at so-called Afair reuse value@ is not equivalent to a transfer at the
Afair market price,@ and therefore California construction workers who perform work on such projects
must be paid prevailing wages.
* Wagner v. Professional Engineers in California Gov=t: Established that the appropriate remedy for
legal deficiencies in a union=s annual fair share fee notice is for the union to correct and re-issue the
notice, not to refund fees previously collected.
* Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers Local 3 v. Northern California Mason Contractors
Multiemployer Bargaining Ass=n: Obtained an arbitration award upholding a union=s right to allocate
annual economic increases under a collective bargaining agreement between wages and fringe benefits.
* Contra Costa County and Contra Costa Public Defenders Ass=n: Obtained an arbitration award
against Contra Costa County for violating the Aparity@ clause of its collective bargaining agreement,
which required the county to provide its public defenders with any new benefits provided to its district
* Mendoza-Barrera v. San Andreas HVAC, Inc.: Obtained a stipulated judgment of more than
$200,000 for four sheet metal workers whose employer failed to pay them the prevailing wage on
public works projects.
* Acevedo v. SelectBuild: Obtained a settlement for construction workers who alleged they were
required to work off the clock by their employer, notwithstanding the employer's bankruptcy filing.
* Montoya v. Laborers International Union of North America: Obtained the voluntary dismissal with
prejudice, after filing a motion to dismiss on grounds of justiciability and preemption, of a challenge to
an international labor union's procedures from considering a transfer of authority over work in Mohave
County, AZ from one local union to another.
* Southern Wine & Spirits v. Simpkins: Defeated motion for preliminary injunction seeking to
prevent California employee of Florida company from working for California competitor.
* SEIU Local 24/7 and Pacific Gas & Electric Company: Obtained seven-figure arbitration award for
employer's failure to pay its security guards for on-duty meal periods.
* CRONA v. Lucile Packard Children's Hospital: Received an award of $70,355.00 against employers
for their refusal to arbitrate a union grievance.
* Air Line Pilots Association, International, et al. v. United Airlines, Inc.: Obtained declaratory and
injunctive relief on behalf of United Airlines pilots requiring the airline to comply with California's Kin
Care law, which requires employers that offer paid sick leave to allow employees to use up to half of
that leave to care for ill relatives.
* UGL-UNNICO Service Co.: Helped obtain National Labor Relations Board decision reinstating a
bar to challenging a union's majority status after a new employer assumes control of an organized
facility, thereby allowing the parties a reasonable period of time to negotiate a collective bargaining
* United Healthcare Workers-West v. Borsos: Successfully litigated adversary trial in bankruptcy
court and obtained an order preventing a former local union official who had been held liable in federal
district court for violation of his fiduciary duties to the union from discharging that judgment debt in
* S&F Market Street Health Care LLC and Windsor of North Long Beach : Obtained victory before
NLRB administrative law judge and NLRA '10(j) injunction in case alleging that nursing home
employer engaged in unlawful Asurface bargaining@ by unyieldingly insisting on a package of contract
proposals that would have forced the Union to surrender all representational authority for the duration
of the collective bargaining agreement.
* Sheen v. SAG: Successfully defeated motion for preliminary injunction under the
Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act seeking to stop the counting of votes in a union
merger election, resulting in the merger passing by an overwhelming majority.
* Holloway v. Best Buy Co., Inc.: Obtained a consent decree, with a four-year duration, in a federal
court class action providing for changes in Best Buy's personnel policies and procedures which will
enhance the equal employment opportunities for the thousands of women, African Americans, and
Latinos employed by Best Buy nationwide.
* Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court: Obtained unanimous California Supreme Court decision
establishing standards governing meal period and rest break claims, and affirming in part and reversing
in part trial court=s certification of class of low-wage restaurant workers.
* Carrillo v. Schneider Logistics, Inc.: Obtained Ninth Circuit affirmance of preliminary injunctions
on behalf of low-wage warehouse workers against joint employers, requiring accurate payroll
recordkeeping and paystub disclosures, and prohibiting planned mass retaliatory termination.
* D.R. Horton: On behalf of amici SEIU and Change to Win, obtained NLRB ruling that employers
commit unfair labor practice by including prohibition against joint, class, and collective actions in
mandatory employment arbitration agreement.
* Reed v. Los Angeles Unified School District: Overturned on appeal a California Superior Court
decision approving a settlement agreement that impaired the statutory and contractual rights of public
school teachers, over the objection of the teachers' representative (which had not agreed to the
settlement), on the grounds that the approval of the settlement violated the teachers' due process right to
an adjudication of the merits of the underlying claim and the requirements of the California statute
regarding judgments based on settlements
* Professional Engineers in California Government, et al. v. Brown, et al.: Obtained ruling that
California Governor and Department of Personnel Administration exceeded the authority granted to
them by the Legislature to impose unpaid furlough on public employees.
* CRONA and Stanford Hospital & Clinics: Obtained arbitration decision finding that employer
violated recognition clause of collective bargaining agreement by transferring represented nurses= duties
to non-union nurses.
* Turtle Bay Exploration Park, City of Redding: Obtained a decision on administrative appeal that a
hotel project is covered by the California's prevailing wage law because the developer is not paying
fair-market rent for the use of public land, overturning the agency's original, contrary determination.
* Air Conditioning Trades Association v. Baker: Obtained the dismissal of a constitutional challenge
to a California law that protects prospective apprentices from exploitation by requiring a showing of a
training need before state approval will be granted to new apprenticeship programs.
* CRONA and Stanford Hospital & Clinics: Obtained arbitration decision finding that union could
grieve employer=s violations of procedural protections in collective bargaining agreement related to
termination of probationary employees.
* Kairy v. SuperSuttle Int’l, Inc. Successful Ninth Circuit appeal reversing dismissal of California
employment law claims by misclassified airport drivers whose employer argued that allowing the
claims to proceed in court would impermissibly interfere with the regulatory authority of the California
Public Utilities Commission.
* California Teachers Ass’n v. Governing Bd. of Salinas City Elementary Sch. Dist. On remand from
California Supreme Court, reversed prior published court of appeal opinion that had required union to
arbitrate non-waivable statutory claims brought on behalf of its members rather than pursuing those
claims in court.
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH
* NRDC v. Patterson (Rodgers): Obtained a court ruling that the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation illegally
dried up California=s second longest river by diverting excessive amounts of water for agricultural and
other uses, and subsequently negotiated a comprehensive settlement providing for restoration of the
river and reintroduction of native salmon population.
* United Steelworkers v. California Dep=t of Forestry and Fire Protection: Obtained a decision holding
that the California Department of Forestry=s approval of a plan to log vast portions of California=s
redwood forests violated the California Forest Practice Act=s requirements for a sustainable yield plan.
* Orff v. United States (Supreme Court): Obtained ruling (based on arguments in merits brief filed on
behalf of environmental organizations) rejecting challenge brought by agribusiness interests to the
federal government=s reduction of contractual water allocations to a local water district for the purpose
of protecting threatened salmon and smelt.
* California Healthcare Ass=n v. California Dep=t of Health Svcs.: Defeated a hospital industry
challenge to a California health regulation requiring minimum nurse-to-patient staffing ratios.
* Les v. Reilly: Required the Environmental Protection Agency strictly to apply the Delaney Clause=s
prohibition against cancer-causing substances in processed foods.
* Public Citizen v. Dep=t of Transportation: Obtained a Ninth Circuit ruling (later overturned by the
Supreme Court) blocking for several years the federal government=s decision to allow
Mexico-domiciled trucks to travel throughout the United States without an Environmental Impact
Statement and a Clean Air Act conformity analysis.
* California v. Browner: Obtained a consent decree, in a challenge to EPA=s systematic failure to
enforce federal food safety laws, that required dozens of cancer-causing pesticides to be removed from
the food supply.
* NRDC v. Price Pfister: Compelled major faucet manufacturers to eliminate lead from drinking water
faucets pursuant to Proposition 65, the California Toxics Initiative.
* NRDC v. The Reclamation Bd. of the Resources Agency of the State of California : Obtained a writ
of mandate overturning a state administrative agency=s approval of an extensive development project on
top of a major levee in the Sacramento River Delta, for violating regulations governing flood control
* Sunshine Canyon: Successfully advocated in land use proceedings, on behalf of a coalition of
environmental, labor, and community organizations, for stringent environmental conditions to be placed
on a large solid waste landfill in Los Angeles County.
* NRDC v. EPA: Settled Clean Air Act case requiring warning labels on processed foods
manufactured with methyl bromide, an ozone-depleting substance.
* NRDC v. EPA: Compelled the Environmental Protection Agency to stop holding Aclosed-door@
meetings with industry representatives before setting pesticide health and safety standards.
* NRDC v. Whitman: Forced EPA to reassess the safety of some of the nation=s most dangerous
pesticides to protect children, farmworkers, and consumers.
* NRDC v. Smith Kline: Required reductions in lead content of calcium dietary supplements.
* EDF & NRDC v. Sta-Rite: Successfully challenged the widespread use of lead in submersible water
pumps under the California Toxics Initiative.
* Tosco Corp. v. Communities for a Better Environment: Defeated a declaratory judgment action
brought by an oil company to preclude environmental organizations from seeking penalties for its
discharges of dioxin.
* AFL-CIO v. Deukmejian: Required the Governor of California to expand tenfold the list of
carcinogenic chemicals included within the California Toxics Initiative.
* California Labor Federation v. Cal. OSHA: Preserved the California Toxics Initiative against an
OSHA preemption attack.
* AFL-CIO v. Deukmejian: Overturned a regulation exempting food, drugs and cosmetics from the
California Toxics Initiative.
* NRDC v. OEHHA: Forced state environmental agency to withdraw Arecords retention@ policy that
had required agency scientists to destroy data and documents that were inconsistent with final agency
* AFL-CIO v. Gorsuch: Overturned an EPA moratorium on public disclosure of industry pesticide
health and safety studies.
* NRDC v. Wilson: Required the Governor of California timely to determine whether to expand the
list of reproductive toxicants included within the California Toxics Initiative to include five dozen
chemicals identified as reproductive toxicants by U.S. EPA.
* NRDC v. Badger Meters, Inc.: Required manufacturers of water meters that leach lead into
residential drinking water to shift to a low lead emitting alloy.
* NRDC v. Safeway, Inc.: Required large grocery retailers to achieve a substantial reduction in diesel
truck emissions around their grocery distribution centers, which are located primarily in low-income
* Environmental Law Foundation v. Crystal Geyser Water Co. : Required manufacturers to eliminate
unlawfully high levels of arsenic, trihalomethanes, and heterotrophic bacteria from bottled drinking
* City and County of San Francisco v. United States Tobacco Co.: Required warnings to be provided
to consumers regarding the health dangers of smokeless tobacco products.
* Environmental Law Foundation v. Ironite Products Co.: Obtained a consent judgment banning the
continued sale in California of a fertilizer manufactured from hazardous waste that contained excessive
levels of arsenic and lead.
* In re Vinegar Litigation: Obtained settlements requiring food retailers to post consumer warnings
regarding the presence of lead in balsamic vinegar.
* In re St. Lukes Hospital Merger: Persuaded the California Attorney General to conduct a review of
the terms of a proposed merger of two hospitals, including the extent to which the merger would serve
or disserve the needs of the affected communities.
* NRDC v. Kempthorne: Working closely with NRDC and Earthjustice, we overturned the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service=s biological opinion on the effect of the California Central Valley Project=s
operations on threatened Delta smelt and obtained protective interim remedies, including reduced water
pumping from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and an order requiring the Service to issue a
new biological opinion.
* Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen=s Associations v. Gutierrez: Working closely with NRDC and
Earthjustice, we overturned the National Marine Fisheries Service=s biological opinion on the effect of
the California Central Valley Project=s operations on three species of threatened and endangered salmon
and obtained protective interim remedies, including early opening of dam gates and shortening the
periods in which the gates are closed, facilitating migration up and down the Sacramento River; also
obtained an order requiring the Service to issue a new biological opinion.
* Firebaugh Canal Water District v. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation: Joined with U.S. Interior
Department in defeating San Joaquin Valley water districts' attempts to compel the Government to
provide them low-cost drainage services, which would have kept more toxic-laden agricultural lands in
production and required more water diversions. The irrigation districts lost their challenges in the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of California and in the Ninth Circuit.
* Conant v. McCaffrey: Obtained a permanent injunction under the First Amendment prohibiting the
federal government from revoking or threatening to revoke the prescription drug licenses of California
physicians on the basis of their confidential communications with their seriously ill patients regarding
* Walker v. Air Line Pilots Ass=n: Obtained a jury verdict following a ten-week trial upholding the
right of the Air Line Pilots Association to engage in free speech activities promoting solidarity among
* Eller Media Co. v. City of Oakland: Defeated efforts by billboard and alcohol industry to overturn
City of Oakland ordinance prohibiting billboards advertising alcoholic beverages in residential
neighborhoods and in proximity to schools and playgrounds.
* Sutter Health v. UNITE HERE: Obtained a California Court of Appeal reversal of a $17.3 million
defamation verdict against a union based on a communication that was part of a labor dispute, on the
ground that the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury that the plaintiff was required to prove
* SEIU v. City of Houston: After obtaining a preliminary injunction under the First Amendment,
obtained on appeal a ruling that three Houston ordinances that restrict the right to protest via parades,
public gatherings in public parks, and the use of sound amplification equipment violate the First
* Connelly v. No On 128, the Hayden Initiative: Enforced a California law requiring state initiative
campaign advertisements to identify industry campaign contributors.
* Crawford v. Int=l Union of Rubber Workers Local 703: Obtained reversal of a six-figure jury verdict
against union and picketers who had exercised free speech right to disparage strikebreakers.
* Buyukmihci v. Regents: Obtained a permanent injunction protecting the free speech rights of a
professor of veterinary medicine whom the University of California had tried to fire because of his
animal rights views.
* Carreira v. Trustees of the California State University: Obtained the first order ever issued by a
California court overturning the California State University=s denial of a whistleblower retaliation
complaint and ordering a jury trial on that claim; and subsequently negotiated a $1,787,000 settlement
for the whistleblower, a tenured professor at Cal State Long Beach.
* Furukawa Farms v. CRLA: Successfully defended a statewide poverty law office against a suit
brought by agricultural growers to block its advocacy on behalf of farm workers.
* Auvil v. CBS 60 Minutes: Obtained dismissal of a class action product defamation suit brought by
Washington apple growers against the Natural Resources Defense Council for having publicized the
public health hazards of the growth regulator Alar.
* Coors v. Wallace: Defeated an antitrust suit brought by Adolph Coors Company against the
organizers of a nationwide consumer boycott of Coors beer.
* Evergreen Oil Co. v. Communities for a Better Environment: Obtained the dismissal under
California=s anti-SLAPP statute of an oil company=s defamation action against a non-profit
environmental advocacy group.
* Tosco Corp. v. Communities for a Better Environment: Obtained dismissal for lack of federal
jurisdiction of an oil company=s federal court defamation action against an environmental group that
had engaged in free speech about air pollution issues.
* California Nurses Ass=n v. Stern: Obtained dismissal, under California=s anti-SLAPP statute, of a
lawsuit contending that peaceful home visits by representatives of a labor organization constituted
* ABC Security Service, Inc. v. SEIU Local 24/7: Successfully defended labor union against a SLAPP
suit brought by an employer seeking damages against union for its organizing campaign to obtain
recognition as the representative of the employer=s workers, and negotiated a stipulated dismissal under
which the employer entered into a card-check and neutrality agreement with union to govern the
recognition process, resulting in recognition and a collective bargaining agreement.
* Singer v. American Psychological Ass=n: Obtained dismissal, under California=s anti-SLAPP statute,
of a lawsuit seeking to impose defamation liability on professional associations for statements made in
amicus curiae briefs they had filed in court.
* POSCO v. Contra Costa Building & Construction Trades Council: Defeated an antitrust suit brought
against various labor unions for engaging in environmental lobbying and litigation.
* Recall Grey Davis Committee v. Regents of the University of California: Obtained dismissal, under
California=s anti-SLAPP statute, of a lawsuit seeking to hold the State Building and Construction
Trades Council of California, which sponsored a political event, vicariously liable for spontaneous
protests outside the event venue.
* Schavrien v. Lynch: Obtained dismissal, under California=s anti-SLAPP law, of a suit against the
former President of the California Public Utilities Commission brought by an executive of an energy
company regulated by the Commission, for publicly exposing the executive=s attendance at a campaign
fundraising event in support of the spouse of a Commissioner.
* Knox v. Westly: Defeated preliminary injunction motion brought several days before statewide
election to prohibit union from spending union dues and fees to oppose anti-worker ballot initiatives,
and subsequently obtained Ninth Circuit decision that union had no legal obligation to provide
non-members with a mid-year fair share fee notice when it enacted a temporary increase in dues and
* Mosqueda v. CCPOA: Defeated a libel action brought by prison warden against correctional officers
union for statements made in support of litigation initiated by a union officer.
* Western Growers Ass=n v. UFW: Obtained dismissal under California=s anti-SLAPP statute of an
Aunfair business practices@ action brought by a growers= association against a union for its free speech
* Allied Pilots Ass=n v. San Francisco: Obtained an injunction allowing pilots to handbill and picket at
San Francisco International Airport.
* Bruce Church, Inc. v. UFW: Overturned on First Amendment and statutory grounds a $10 million
judgment against the United Farm Workers for engaging in allegedly improper boycott activity.
* Guess?, Inc. v. UNITE: Obtained dismissal under California=s anti-SLAPP statute of complaint
alleging union had unlawfully supported picketing and litigation activity directed against employer=s
* UFW v. Dutra Farms: Obtained judgments against 18 growers and growers= association prohibiting
them from illegally financing an Aemployee committee@ to defeat union organizing drives.
* Steam Press Holdings, Inc. v. Hawaii Teamsters, Local 996 : Established that federal labor law
precludes an employer from obtaining damages under state defamation law for economic losses
resulting from a strike.
CAMPAIGN AND ELECTION
* Brunner v. Ohio Republican Party (U.S. Supreme Court): Helped to defeat the Republican Party=s
attempt during the November 2008 election to require Ohio election officials to turn over the records of
newly registered voters whose voter registration and motor vehicle information did not match, which
would have enabled the Republican Party to seek disenfranchisement of up to 600,000 new voters.
* Curley v. Lake County Bd. of Elections and Registration: Obtained injunction requiring early voting
in November 2008 election in predominantly African-American and Latino communities of Gary,
Hammond, and East Chicago, Indiana.
* Common Cause of Colorado v. Hoffman: Obtained a stipulation and court order requiring the
Secretary of State to stop the unlawful purging of registered voters prior to the November 2008 election
and to count ballots cast by voters who had previously been improperly purged unless there was clear
and convincing evidence that they were ineligible to vote.
* Colvin v. Brunner: Project Vote v. Madison County Board of Elections/State ex rel. Helped to
defeat the Republican Party=s efforts during the November 2008 election to require voters to wait 30
days after registering to vote before being able to cast an absentee ballot, which would have deprived
thousands of voters of their right to vote absentee.
* AFL-CIO v. Eu: Invalidated a proposed initiative requiring a new federal constitutional convention
on the ground that it violated Article V of the U.S. Constitution.
* Common Cause v. Jones: Obtained a court order requiring the replacement of pre-scored punch card
voting machines in California prior to the 2004 Presidential election.
* Fleischman v. Protect Our City: Obtained, and successfully defended in the Arizona Supreme Court,
an injunction removing an anti-immigrant initiative from the November 2006 Phoenix ballot on the
ground that the city law granting initiative supporters the right to supplement signatures after the filing
deadline is preempted by state law.
* Hawaii State AFL-CIO v. Yoshina: Overturned on state election law grounds Hawaii=s decision to
ignore abstentions in determining whether the required percentage of votes was cast in favor of a ballot
measure calling for a new state constitutional convention.
* Central California Farmers Ass=n v. Eu: Defeated on state constitutional grounds an attempt by
agribusiness to remove a comprehensive environmental protection initiative from the California ballot.
* Kneebone v. Norris: Successfully defended a local election official=s decision to reject an initiative
petition, which would have prohibited a city from entering into project labor agreements on any
city-funded construction projects, on the ground that the initiative=s proponents failed to comply with
the publication requirements of the Election Code.
* Cardona v. Oakland Unified School District: Upheld the City of Oakland=s right to delay
redistricting on basis of the 1990 census until the census was adjusted to correct for the disproportionate
undercount of minorities.
* Bennett v. Yoshina: Successfully defended against a federal court due process challenge the Hawaii
electorate=s vote to refuse to hold a new state constitutional convention.
* Barry v. Nishioka: Obtained a writ of mandate ordering election officials to place candidates on
ballot despite apparent noncompliance with nomination petition formalities.
* Edrington v. Floyd: Successfully defended City of Oakland=s wording of ballot question and ballot
analysis for Ajust cause@ eviction initiative against challenge by landlords.
* Dallman v. Ritter: Obtained, and successfully defended in the Colorado Supreme Court, a
preliminary injunction against Colorado Amendment 54, a voter initiative that would have banned
public employee unions from making political contributions in state and local elections, on the ground
the initiative violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
* AFL-CIO v. Chertoff: Obtained nation-wide injunction against a Department of Homeland Security
regulation that would turn Social Security Administration Ano-match@ letters into an
immigration-enforcement tool without authorization from Congress.
* Catholic Social Services/Ayuda/Immigrant Assistance Project v. Reno: Obtained the right to apply
for legalization under the Immigration Reform and Control Act for hundreds of thousands of
undocumented aliens who were prevented from applying because of unlawful INS regulations; and
negotiated temporary work authorization for approximately three million aliens potentially eligible for
legalization under the Immigration Reform and Control Act.
* Calif. Rural Legal Assistance v. Legal Services Corp.: Overturned a regulation prohibiting the
provision of federally-funded legal services to a nationwide class of several million aliens who had
been legalized through the amnesty process.
* SEIU Local 535 v. Thornburgh: Compelled the Immigration and Naturalization Service to rescind a
regulation that deprived temporary nonimmigrant workers of the right to strike.
* Patel v. Quality Inn South / EEOC v. Tortilleria ALa Mejor@: Through a series of cases, established
the eligibility of undocumented immigrant workers for the full remedial protections of the Fair Labor
Standards Act and Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
* Lopez-Alvarado v. Ashcroft: Obtained Ninth Circuit reversal of Board of Immigration Appeal=s
decision ordering deportation of an immigrant family that had lived in the United States for more than
* Int=l Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftsmen v. Meese: Obtained decision prohibiting
government and employers from using non-immigrant business (B-1) visas to circumvent the
requirement that temporary, non-immigrant, foreign workers not undercut the prevailing wage.
* Blessing v. Freestone (Supreme Court): Preserved the availability of 42 U.S.C. ' 1983 in cases
seeking enforcement of federal statutory rights.
* Kashmiri v. Regents: Won a $33.8 million class action judgment against the University of California
for improperly charging fee increases to tens of thousands of undergraduate, graduate and professional
students, and obtained a preliminary injunction prohibiting the University from charging professional
students an additional $15 million in fees.
* Horton v. Mayle: Obtained a Ninth Circuit habeas corpus remand of former death penalty
defendant=s murder conviction due to the prosecutor=s failure to disclose potentially exculpatory
evidence, and obtained reversal of the conviction after district court evidentiary hearing, resulting in
client's freedom after 27 years in prison.
* Jane Doe v. Reddy: Obtained $11 million settlement in human trafficking case on behalf of young
Indian women who were unlawfully brought into the United States and forced to provide sex and free
* Anderson v. Regents: Obtained an $11 million recovery in a Contracts Clause class action
challenging the University of California=s refusal to fund thousands of university professors= merit
* Oster v. Wagner: Obtained a injunction to block implementation of a California statute that would
have severely reduced the eligibility of elderly and disabled Californians for in-home support services
that enable them to remain in their own homes.
* Eklund v. Byron Union School District: Established the right of public school teachers to use games,
role-playing, and other methods considered to be best pedagogical practices to teach about the history,
culture and religion of Islam as part of a secular program of education in a world history class.
* United States ex rel. Hendow v. University of Phoenix: Won a $78.5 million settlement in a False
Claims Act case against a for-profit university that allegedly defrauded the government by falsely
certifying its compliance with the Higher Education Act's prohibition against paying commissions to
recruiters of new students, the second-larges settlement ever of a False Claims Act case in which the
U.S. Government declined to intervene.
* Dominguez v. Schwarzenegger: Obtained temporary restraining order in federal court, blocking
Fresno County from reducing, to the California minimum wage, the wages of In Home Supportive
* Sharp v. Next Entertainment, Inc.: Helped to obtain decision holding that the California Rules of
Professional Responsibility do not preclude labor unions and other advocacy groups from funding class
action litigation, by filing amicus curiae brief and presenting oral argument on behalf of labor and
public interest groups, including the ACLU of Southern California.
* Utility Consumers= Action Network v. Sears/California Federal Bank/Household Credit Service/
Texaco Credit Card Services/Capital One/Bank of America: Obtained settlements in a series of
consumer privacy class actions against financial institutions and credit card companies prohibiting
unauthorized dissemination of personal account information to third party telemarketers.
* In re Gulf USA Corporation and Pintlar Corporation: Preserved millions of dollars of retiree medical
benefits in a major bankruptcy proceeding on behalf of thousands of retired Idaho mine and smelter
* California Labor Federation v. Cal. OSHA: Invalidated, on state constitutional grounds, California
Budget Act restrictions on the state=s payment of public interest attorneys= fees.
* Gardner v. Schwarzenegger: Obtained restraining order, preliminary injunction, and permanent
injunction, which was affirmed on appeal, against enforcement of a state statute that would have
permitted incarceration of non-violent drug offenders, contrary to California Proposition 36, which
mandated probation and drug treatment.
* Hamilton v. Great Expectations: Obtained an $8.5 million settlement of a statewide class action
against a video dating service that had electronically eavesdropped on confidential membership
* People v. Horton: Obtained a California Supreme Court death penalty reversal on the direct appeal
of a capital case.
* Garvin v. Utility Consumers' Action Network/Savage v. Utility Consumers' Action Network :
Successful defense on appeal of a $14 million settlement of a state law privacy class action challenging
a bank's practice of selling confidential consumer information to third-party marketing companies.
* IBEW Local 595 v. Aubry: Enjoined the Department of Industrial Relations from spending taxpayer
funds to implement a new methodology that would drastically cut prevailing wage rates, where the
Legislature had refused to appropriate funds for that purpose.
* Jensen v. Kaiser Permanente: Obtained the rescission of an HMO=s cost-cutting policy requiring
staff psychiatrists to prescribe psychotropic medications for patients they have not examined.
* Welfare Rights Org. v. Crisan: Established an evidentiary privilege for communications between
applicants for public benefits and their lay representatives, including union representatives.
* California State Building and Construction Trades Council v. Duncan : Enjoined the expenditure of
state funds on administrative rulemaking proceedings that would have lowered the minimum wage for
apprentices throughout California, on the ground that the Governor lacked the authority to item-veto the
Legislature=s decision not to fund such proceedings.
* Rogers v. Governing Bd. of the Sacramento City Unified Sch. Dist.: Obtained a writ of mandate and
a permanent injunction under the California Charter Schools Act prohibiting a school board from
converting an existing public high school into a charter school without the approval of a majority of the
school=s teachers and requiring the school district to open a new non-charter public high school upon a
showing of community support.
* In re Sealed Case: Obtained a $13.2 million settlement of a False Claims Act case and two related
wrongful termination cases on behalf of a husband and wife who were terminated after disclosing
extensive fraud committed by their government contractor employer.
* NAACP v. Davis: Reinstated statutory requirement that California Highway Patrol collect racial
profiling data, despite gubernatorial funding veto.
* California Court Reporters Ass=n v. Judicial Council: Struck down rules that would have allowed
replacement of official court reporters with audiotape recordings in California Superior Courts, and
obtained an injunction against expenditures of taxpayer funds in furtherance of such rules.
* In re Marriage Cases: Helped obtain California Supreme Court decision upholding the right to
same-sex marriage under the California Constitution, by filing amicus curiae brief in conjunction with
professors and students from Howard University Law School.
* Davidson v. County of Sonoma: Obtained a substantial settlement on behalf of a law enforcement
officer injured as a result of his employer=s mock hostage training exercise in which he was seized and
threatened at gunpoint.
* County of Alameda v. Aubry: Enjoined California from reducing the prevailing wage in the
construction industry by 20 percent where the agency had failed to comply with APA rulemaking
* Vasquez v. State of California: Obtained a unanimous California Supreme Court decision holding
that prevailing plaintiffs who seek private attorney general fees are not required, as a condition of
eligibility for a fee award, to demonstrate that they made efforts to settle their dispute before filing their
* Olney v. Pringle: Negotiated a settlement prohibiting state legislators from paying large retroactive
salary increases to select staff in violation of the State Constitution.
* Gary W. v. State of Louisiana; La Raza Unida v. Volpe: Required Louisiana and California to pay
federal court civil rights attorney=s fee awards despite refusal of State Legislatures to appropriate the
* Dominguez v. Schwarzenegger: Obtained, and successfully defended on appeal, a preliminary
injunction against the implementation of a state statute that would have reduced the wages of providers
of in-home support services to elderly and disabled Californians.
* Nobles v. MBNA Corp.: Settlement of a California consumer class action against a bank that
misleadingly offered consumer lines of credit without disclosing hidden costs and credit impacts,
resulting in a payment to class members of more than 85% of the claimed losses with interest.
* M.R. v. Dreyfus: Obtained a Ninth Circuit ruling that plaintiffs challenging a ten percent reduction
to hours of Medicaid home care services are entitled to a preliminary injunction under the Americans
with Disabilities Act.
* Oster v. Lightbourne: Obtained a preliminary injunction to block implementation of a California
statute that would have reduced by 20 percent the hours of in-home support services provided to elderly
and disabled Californians funder the state's Medicaid program.
* Luquetta v. Regents: Won more than $48 million in a class action case against the University of
California for improperly charging fee increases to almost 3,000 professional students.
* Hart v. Electronic Arts: Successful, argued Third Circuit Appeal that reversed summary judgment
for video game manufacturer in case balancing First Amendment and state right-of-publicity interests of
game manufacturers and interests of NCAA student athletes.
Altshuler Berzon=s current docket includes the following matters:
* UFCW v. Brewer: Obtained a permanent injunction under the First Amendment against provisions
of two Arizona statutes, SB 1363 and SB 1365, that limit unions’ ability to collect member dues, to
participate in political advocacy, and to engage in protected speech activities.
* Harris v. Quinn: The defense in the U.S. Supreme Court of an Illinois statute that permits in-home
care workers to unionize and negotiate collective bargaining agreements.
* Ammari Electronics v. Pacific Bell Directory: Defense on appeal of $17.35 million jury verdict on
behalf of small businesses who paid for but did not receive best-efforts distribution of Pacific Bell
Yellow Page Directories.
* Kairy v. Supershuttle Int'l: Ninth Circuit interlocutory appeal of order compelling individual
arbitration of misclassified employees' wage claims.
* Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless v. Husted and SEIU Local 1 v. Husted : Two actions in
federal court seeking to prohibit Ohio from disqualifying thousands of votes cast by registered Ohio
voters based on errors by poll workers, on the ground that disenfranchisement of these voters violates
federal equal protection and due process.
* Friendly House v. Whiting: A federal court constitutional challenge to Arizona=s 2010 law requiring
State enforcement of immigration law.
* 24 Hour Fitness/D.R. Horton: Cases of first impression before the NLRB and Fifth Circuit to
establish that an employer=s mandatory arbitration agreement prohibiting class or collective actions
must be enjoined because it violates Sections 7 and 8(a)(1) of the NLRA.
* International Brotherhood of Teamsters, et al. v. U.S. Department of Transportation, et al.: A federal
court lawsuit to block the Obama administration=s attempt to allow Mexico-domiciled trucks to travel
throughout the United States without complying with specific congressional safety prerequisites
governing such action.
* Villareal v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company: A proposed collective action before the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of Georgia brought against R.J. Reynolds and its two hiring agencies
alleging age discrimination against job applicants 40 years of age or older.
* Iskanian v. CLS Transportation: California Supreme Court amicus brief explaining why class action
prohibition in employer’s mandatory arbitration agreement violates Section 7 and 8(a)(1) of NLRA.
*Borda v. Fidelity: Petition for writ of mandate to Ninth Circuit challenging order disqualifying trial
counsel and prohibiting contacts with putative class members.
* Keller v. California State University: A state court class action lawsuit against the California State
University alleging the University breached its contracts with thousands of students by imposing
last-minute fee increases.
* Luquetta v. Regents of the University of California: A state court class action against the University
of California alleging the University breached contracts by increasing fees for tens of thousands of
undergraduate, graduate and professional students.
* Air Line Pilots Ass=n, Int=l v. United Air Lines: A state court lawsuit challenging a national airline=s
violation of California=s Akin care@ law by refusing to permit all airline pilots domiciled in California to
use their accrued paid sick leave to care for ill family members.
* Sierra Club v. Brown: A lawsuit against the Governor's administration for delays in adding
substances to the list of chemicals in California that are known to cause cancer and reproductive harm.
* NRDC v. Kempthorne: Federal environmental challenge to long-term contracts for the delivery of
more than 2.3 million acre-feet of California Central Valley Project water, which pose a severe risk to
the survival and recovery of the threatened Delta smelt.
* SEIU Healthcare Michigan v. Snyder: A challenge based on the Contract Clause of the U.S.
Constitution to a Michigan statute that would nullify an existing collective bargaining agreement
covering thousands of homecare workers.
* Regents of the University of Wisconsin v. Adidas: Motion to intervene on behalf of Indonesian
labor union in action brought to hold Adidas responsible under University sponsorship agreement and
Collegiate Licensing Corporation Codes of Conduct for unpaid wages owed to thousands of Indonesian
workers employed by bankrupt factory that manufactured Adidas apparel.
* Carrillo v. Schneider Logistics, Inc.: Class action pending in federal district court and Ninth Circuit
on behalf of low-wage immigrant warehouse workers in California=s Inland Empire who contend that
warehouse operator and labor services contractors are joint employers liable for state and federal
wage-and-hour violations, including for imposing unlawful group piece rate scheme, wage fraud, and
wrongful mass retaliatory termination.
*Wells Fargo v. City of Richmond; Bank of New York v. City of Richmond: The defense of lawsuits
filed against the city of Richmond that allege it would be illegal for the city to exercise eminent domain
authority to condemn residential mortgage loans.
* Hart v. Electronic Arts/Keller v. Electronic Arts: Amicus briefs in the Third Circuit and Ninth
Circuit on behalf of professional sports player associations, and argument in the Third Circuit on behalf
of former NCAA athlete, contending that that video game manufacturer violates athletes= state law right
of publicity by using realistic likenesses of players without permission in ANCAA Football@ video
game, notwithstanding defense that video games are protected expression under the First Amendment.
* Narayan v. EGL, Inc.: A class action lawsuit asserting wage and hour claims under the California
Labor Code on behalf of delivery truck drivers who were unlawfully treated as independent contractors
rather than employees.
* Faulkner v. Dominguez: The defense of a union representing airline ramp, operations, provisions
and freight agents in an action for breach of contract.
* Behaein v. Pizza Hut: A class action lawsuit on behalf of hourly restaurant employees, including
drivers, for Pizza Hut's California restaurants alleging that Pizza Hut forces hourly workers to work
through meal and rest breaks and fails to reimburse them for their out-of-pocket costs.
* Robert Bell v. Farmers Services: A class action alleging that Farmers Services misclassifies tech
support workers as exempt from overtime.
* Hines v. KFC: The parties have reached a $3.55 million settlement of this wage-and-hour class
action alleging that KFC failed to provide its employees proper compensation for missed meal and rest
breaks and work performed off the clock. The judge preliminarily approved the settlement in October
2012. On February 13, 2013, the court granted final approval to a $3.55 million settlement.
* Van Zandt v. Apple, Inc.: False advertising and breach of warranty consumer class action
challenging design defect in iPhone 3G that limited connectivity speeds.
* Pryor v. Overseas Administrative Services, Inc. : AAA class arbitration and related federal court
litigation challenging KBR/Haliburton's practice of not paying required contract wages to truck drivers
* D'Arrigo Bros. Co. of California v. United Farm Workers: Appeal from a California Superior Court
decision denying a motion under California's anti-SLAPP statute to dismiss a civil lawsuit seeking
money damages for a union's alleged conduct in assisting the General Counsel of the ALRB in an
administrative hearing regarding the union's unfair labor practice charges and election objections.
* Salinas Elementary Teachers Council v. Governing Board of Salinas Elementary School District :
Proceedings in California Court of Appeal on remand from California Supreme Court, which ordered
Court of Appeal to vacate and reconsider its prior opinion holding that teachers union was required to
arbitrate its claim brought on behalf of individual teachers that school district violated a non-waivable
provision of the California Education Code before pursuing the claim in court.
* Kilby v. CVS/Henderson v. J.P. Morgan Chase/Brown v. Walmart: Consolidated Ninth Circuit
appeals from lower court orders construing the California Wage Order requirement that retail
employers must “provide” their employees with “suitable seats when the nature of the work reasonably
permits the use of seats."
* Tokoshima v. The Pep Boys -- Manny, Moe & Jack: A state court class action alleging minimum
wage violations and failure to reimburse employees for the cost of tools necessary to perform their jobs.
* Brooks v. U.S. Bank: Action challenging U.S. Bank's failure to provide suitable seating for tellers at
in-store bank locations.
* Marchelos v. Reputation.com: Overtime class action on behalf of employees of internet services
company that assigned salespeople to 10-hour daily shifts without paying statutory overtime.
* Reed v. Los Angeles Unified School District: Defending on petition for review to the California
Supreme Court a Court of Appeal decision that invalidated a California Superior Court decision
approving a settlement agreement that impaired the statutory and contractual rights of public school
teachers, over the objection of the teachers' representative (which had not agreed to the settlement), on
the grounds that the approval of the settlement violated the teachers' due process right to an
adjudication of the merits of the underlying claim and the requirements of the California statute
regarding judgments based on settlements.
* Acquisto v. Sacramento City Unified School District: Writ of Mandate action challenging school
board's violation of Education Code provision requiring budget-based layoffs of teachers and other staff
to be done in reverse order of seniority.
* American Postal Workers Union v. United States Postal Svc.: Federal district court action to enjoin
the Postal Service from laying off potentially hundreds of employees before the union's grievance
challenging the layoffs can be arbitrated.
*Turtle Bay v. Baker: The defense in court of an administrative decision holding that workers who
build a hotel project in Redding, California are entitled to be paid prevailing wages.
* Piacente v. Int'l Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers: Defense of International Union
against a federal court claim challenging the union's internal disciplinary procedure brought by a former
local union officer who was found through that procedure to have violated the union's disciplinary code.
* NRDC v. Blank: An action challenging the U.S. Navy=s five-year permit to use low frequency active
sonar in close to seventy-five percent of the world=s oceans, and alleging that the approval and use of
this sonar violates the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the
Endangered Species Act.
* As You Sow v. Quikrete: An action under California=s Proposition 65 alleging that manufacturers of
cement mixes failed adequately to warn the public that the mixes contain chemicals known to the State
of California to cause cancer and reproductive harm.
* Professional Engineers in California Government v. Brown; California Association of Professional
Scientists v. Brown; Consolidated actions challenging furloughs of public employees that were
unilaterally implemented by the Governor of California. Following remand from the Supreme Court
and Court of Appeals, the trial court ruled in favor of the public employee unions, and that decision is
currently on appeal.
* Salinas Elementary Teachers Council v. Governing Bd. of Salinas City Elementary Sch. Dist.
State court action brought by local teachers union on behalf of individual teachers challenging school
district’s violation of non-waivable statutory pay uniformity requirements.
We also represent many local unions and apprenticeship programs on general matters, including
litigation, negotiations, arbitrations and advice. In addition, we represent many workers in individual
employment matters, we represent public agencies in selected constitutional cases, we defend public
interest groups against SLAPP suits, we represent law firms and public interest organizations on
statutory and common fund attorneys= fees matters, and we provide legal advice on the drafting of
ALTSHULER BERZON=S ATTORNEYS
Fred H. Altshuler, who retired in 2010, was a founding partner of Altshuler Berzon LLP. He is
a graduate of Stanford University and the University of Chicago Law School, where he was Articles
Editor of the University of Chicago Law Review. He served as a law clerk to Judge John C. Godbold of
the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. From 1969 to 1973, he was a Directing
Attorney for California Rural Legal Assistance, and from 1975 to 1978, he practiced with the San
Francisco law firm of Howard, Prim, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady & Pollak. During the Watergate
controversy in 1974, he was Counsel to the Impeachment Inquiry staff of the U.S. House of
Representatives Judiciary Committee. He is a Life Fellow of the American Bar Foundation, has been on
the Boards of Directors of the Bar Association of San Francisco, the Lawyers Club of San Francisco,
the CORO Foundation, and California Rural Legal Assistance, and is Co-Chair of the Bar Association
of San Francisco's Amicus Curiae Committee. He also serves on the boards of the New Israel Fund
(San Francisco Region), Public Advocates and the Planning Association for the Richmond. He was a
delegate at the 1996 Democratic National Convention, and in 2004 he was California State Counsel for
the Kerry/Edwards Campaign. Mr. Altshuler is listed in "The Best Lawyers in America" for
Stephen P. Berzon is a founding partner at Altshuler Berzon LLP where he specializes in major
litigation, frequently involving labor and employment, environment and public health, campaign and
election, and constitutional issues, both at the trial and appellate levels. He is a graduate of Cornell
University and Harvard Law School. He served as a law clerk to Judge Alvin B. Rubin of the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. He was formerly the Legal Director of the
Children's Defense Fund, a public interest organization in Washington, D.C. He also practiced with the
Legal Aid Society of Alameda County, and the National Housing and Economic Development Law
Project of the University of California, Berkeley Law School (Boalt Hall). He is currently a member of
the Ninth Circuit=s Advisory Committee on Rules and Internal Operating Procedures. He is also a
member of the Executive Committee of the Northern District of California Chapter of the Federal Bar
Association. He served for seven years (January, 2005 - December, 2011) as a member of the National
Board of Directors of the American Constitution Society, and for nine years (2000-2009) as a member
of the Board of Directors of the national AFL-CIO Lawyers Coordinating Committee. He also served as
Chair of the City of Berkeley Police Review Commission, and as a member of the Board of Directors
of the Urban Strategies Council. He received the Voting Rights Award from the ACLU of Southern
California in 2002 for his work on voting rights litigation. In 2009, he was named a California Lawyer
of the Year by California Lawyer Magazine in the area of Civil Rights. He is listed in The Best
Lawyers in America for labor and employment law, and in San Francisco Magazine's Northern
California Super Lawyers in the appellate practice area. He has argued before the United States
Supreme Court, the California Supreme Court, and federal circuit and district courts throughout the
country. He has testified before U.S. Senate and House Committees, and California Senate and
Assembly Committees. He is a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation.
Eric Brown is an associate at Altshuler Berzon LLP. He is a graduate of Yale College and Yale
Law School. Prior to joining the firm, Eric served as a law clerk to Judge Kermit V. Lipez of the United
States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and to Chief Judge Mark L. Wolf of the United States
District Court for the District of Massachusetts.
Hamilton Candee is a partner at Altshuler Berzon LLP. He is a graduate of Princeton University
and New York University Law School, where he was a Root-Tilden Scholar. He served as a law clerk
to Judge Thelton E. Henderson of the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California, and as a legislative assistant in the United States Senate. He was formerly a Senior Attorney
in the San Francisco Office of the Natural Resources Defense Council and Co-Director of NRDC=s
Western Water Project. He has been involved in a variety of efforts to restore ecosystems, protect
endangered species, encourage water conservation, and promote other environmental reforms in federal
and state water policy. He received a CLAY Award as one of California=s "Lawyers of the Year" in
1999 for his work pursuing restoration of the San Joaquin River and received the Bay Institute's Carla
Bard Bay Education award in 2008. He is a member of the Board of Trustees of the NRDC Action
Eve H. Cervantez is a partner at Altshuler Berzon LLP, a San Francisco law firm specializing in
labor and employment, environmental, constitutional, campaign and election, and civil rights law. Eve
specializes in representing workers in employment discrimination and wage and hour class action
lawsuits. She is a graduate of Washington University and Harvard Law School, where she was an editor
of the Harvard Law Review. She served as a law clerk to Judge Charles A. Legge of the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California. Prior to joining Altshuler, Eve worked as a staff
attorney at the Prison Law Office and was a partner at Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP,
where she represented plaintiffs in class action employment and consumer lawsuits. She is the author of
"When Should You Bring State Law Wage and Hour Claims in Addition to, or Instead of, FLSA
Claims," The Employee Advocate (Summer/Fall 2003) and co-author of AAvoiding Procedural Pitfalls@
The Employee Advocate (Summer 2008). She serves on the Senior Editorial Board of The Fair Labor
Standards Act (BNA), and is a chapter editor or contributor to Employment Discrimination Law (BNA,
Cumulative Supplements to Third and Fourth Editions) and Wage and Hour Laws, A State-by-State
Survey (BNA, 2nd Ed. and Supplements). She was selected to Northern California Super Lawyers 2010
and 2011. Eve also lectures regularly on wage and hour, employment discrimination, and class action
Connie K. Chan is an associate at Altshuler Berzon LLP. She is a graduate of Yale College and
Yale Law School. She served as a law clerk to Judge Michael Daly Hawkins of the United States Court
of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and to Judge Lucy H. Koh of the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California.
Barbara J. Chisholm is a partner at Altshuler Berzon LLP. She is a graduate of Swarthmore
College and Howard University School of Law, where she was the Submissions and Symposium Editor
of the Howard Law Journal. She served as a law clerk to Judge Emmet G. Sullivan of the United States
District Court for the District of Columbia. She worked in the Russian Far East for five years, where
she was the founder and director of the Russian Far East branch of ISAR, an organization working on
environmental and human rights issues. She is Chair of the Board of Directors of Pacific Environment
and the Program Co-Chair for the Bay Area Lawyer Chapter of the American Constitution Society. She
previously served on the Executive Committee of the Labor and Employment Section of the California
State Bar, and on the Board of Directors of the AIDS Legal Referral Panel.
Caroline Cincotta is an associate at Altshuler Berzon LLP. She is a graduate of Reed College
and New York University School of Law. She served as a law clerk to Judge Marsha S. Berzon of the
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and was a Soros Fellow with the Immigrants=
Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union.
Jeffrey B. Demain is a partner at Altshuler Berzon LLP. He is a graduate of Brandeis
University (B.A.), where he was summa cum laude and a Louis D. Brandeis Scholar, the University of
California, Irvine (M.A.), where he was a National Science Foundation Fellow, and the law school at
the UC Berkeley School of Law, where he received American Jurisprudence Awards in Labor Law,
Trusts and Estates, and Criminal Procedure, and was a member of the Industrial Relations Law Journal.
He served as a law clerk to Chief Judge James R. Browning of the United States Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circuit. From 1992 through 1999, he was a contributing editor of Construction
Organizing -- An Organizing and Contract Enforcement Guide, published by the George Meany Center
for Labor Studies, Inc. From 1999 through 2002, he was a member of the Executive Committee of the
Labor and Employment Section of the California State Bar. He is the author of "Recent Developments
in Fair Share Fee Law," California Public Employee Relations Journal No. 167 (August 2004). He is
listed in "The Best Lawyers in America" for labor and employment law. He also lectures regularly on
developments in labor and employment law.
James M. Finberg is a partner at Altshuler Berzon LLP. He is a graduate of Brown University
and the University of Chicago Law School, where he was Executive Editor of the University of
Chicago Law Review. He served as a law clerk to Justice Charles Levin of the Michigan Supreme
Court. From 1992 through 2006, he was a partner at Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP. In
2005, he served as President of the Bar Association of San Francisco. From 2000 through 2001, he
served as Co-Chair of the delegation of lawyer representatives from the Northern District of California
to the Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference. He served as the Co-Chair of the Lawyers= Committee for
Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area from 1997 through 1998 and 2009 to 2010, and presently
serves on its Board. He also serves on the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors of the Legal
Aid Society-Employment Law Center of San Francisco and on the Board of Directors of the National
Employment Lawyers Association (ANELA@). He is an adjunct professor of law at the University of
California Hastings College of the Law, where he teaches Employment Discrimination Law. He is a
fellow of the American College of Labor and Employment Lawyers. He is the author, or co-author, of
numerous articles and book chapters on various topics of discrimination and wage/hour law and the use
and trial of class and collective actions. Since 2005, he has also been listed in "The Best Lawyers in
America" for labor and employment Law, most recently in the 20th edition for 2014. In 2009, he was
named a "California Lawyer of the Year" by California Lawyer Magazine. In August 2013, he was
named The Best Lawyers' 2014 Labor and Employment "Lawyer of the Year" in San Francisco.
Eileen B. Goldsmith is a partner at Altshuler Berzon LLP. She is a graduate of Brown
University and Yale Law School, where she was a Notes Editor for the Yale Law Journal. She served
as a law clerk to Judge Marsha S. Berzon of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
She is a member of the Executive Committee of the Labor & Employment Section of the State Bar of
California, and previously served as a Co-Chair of the Labor Law Committee of the National
Employment Lawyers Association. She was listed as a "Northern California Rising Star" in San
Francisco Magazine's 2011 "Super Lawyers" issue.
Scott A. Kronland is partner at Altshuler Berzon LLP. He is a graduate of Cornell University,
where he was Editor-In-Chief of The Cornell Daily Sun, and the UC Berkeley School of Law, where he
was elected to the Order of the Coif and was a member of the California Law Review. He served as a
law clerk to Judge James R. Browning of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. He
is the former Chair and a current member of the Executive Committee of the Labor and Employment
Law Section of the Bar Association of San Francisco. He is listed as a "Superlawyer" by Northern
California Super Lawyers magazine.
Danielle E. Leonard is a partner at Altshuler Berzon LLP. She is a graduate of Harvard and
Radcliffe Colleges and Harvard Law School. She served as a law clerk to Judge Emmet G. Sullivan of
the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and was a trial attorney in the Honors
Program of the United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Voting Rights Section prior
to joining the firm. Danielle currently serves as the co-chair of the Employment Subcommittee of the
Class Actions and Derivative Suits Committee of Litigation Section of the American Bar Association.
Danielle is also a member of the Executive Committee of the Litigation Section of the Bar Association
of San Francisco.
In 2013, Danielle was awarded two ACalifornia Lawyer of the Year@ (CLAY) awards from
California Lawyer Magazine in two separate categories: in Voting Rights, for her work representing
Ohio voters who successfully challenged the unconstitutional rejection of provisional ballots in SEIU
Local 1, et al., v. Husted, and Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless and SEIU District 1199 v.
Husted, and in Education Law, for representing a class of students who won a $39 million judgment
challenging excessive fee charges by the University of California in Luquetta v. Regents of the
University of California. Danielle was also named a "Rising Star" in the 2012 and 2013 Northern
California Super Lawyers listings and selected as a 2013 Benchmark Plaintiff Top 150 Women in
Litigation and 2014 Benchmark Plaintiff Local Litigation Star.
Stacey M. Leyton is a partner at Altshuler Berzon LLP. She is a graduate of Stanford
University and Stanford Law School, where she was a Symposium Editor of the Stanford Law Review
and active in the Public Interest Law Student Association. She served as a law clerk to Justice Stephen
Breyer of the United States Supreme Court, Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the United States Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and Judge Susan Illston of the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California. She served as an Appellate Representative to the Ninth Circuit Judicial
Conference from 2010 until 2013 and has spoken and published articles on a variety of legal topics
including recent Supreme Court decisions, health care reform, federal labor and ERISA preemption,
and legal issues arising from workers' use of e-mail and other technologies. She served on the Board of
Directors of the Public Interest Clearinghouse from 2002 to 2009 and is currently a volunteer with the
Employment Law Center's Workers' Rights Clinic. In 2011, she was named a "California Lawyer of the
Year" by California Lawyer Magazine for her work in a case challenging cutbacks to the California
program providing in-home care to Medicaid recipients. She was selected to the Northern California
2013 Super Lawyers and as a 2012 Benchmark Plaintiff California Local Litigation Star and 2013
Benchmark Plaintiff Top 150 Women in Litigation.
Matthew J. Murray is an associate at Altshuler Berzon LLP. He is a graduate of the University
of California, Berkeley and Harvard Law School, where he was Student Writing Article Editor of the
Harvard Law and Policy Review. He also received a Master in Public Policy degree from the Harvard
University Kennedy School of Government. He served as a law clerk to Chief Justice Margaret
Marshall of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. He was a Coro Fellow and was the student
Regent of the University of California.
Matthew has served as a member of the Board of Directors of the American Civil Liberties
Union of Northern California (ACLU-NC) and is currently a member of the ACLU-NC’s Legal
Committee. He was a contributor to the ABA Section of Labor and Employment Law’s The Fair Labor
Standards Act, 2nd Edition, 2012 Cumulative Supplement. He was named a “Rising Star” in the 2013
Northern California Super Lawyers listing in San Francisco Magazine.
Peter D. Nussbaum is an attorney at Altshuler Berzon LLP. He is a graduate of Cornell
University and Harvard Law School, where he was Articles Editor of the Harvard Law Review. He
served as law clerk to Judge Irving R. Kaufman of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second
Circuit and was a Fulbright Scholar at the London School of Economics. Prior to entering private
practice in 1974, he worked for various legal services programs, including the Center for Social
Welfare, Policy and Law at Columbia University Law School. He has served as a lawyer representative
and Executive Committee Member of the Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference and is a member of the
ABA Committee on Practice and Procedure under the NLRA. He has served as chair of the Democratic
Party of Contra Costa County and as a member of the Democratic Party's State Executive Committee.
He has been listed for 25 years in "The Best Lawyers in America" for labor and employment law. He
has also been designated as a Northern California "Super Lawyer." He is a Fellow of the College of
Labor and Employment Lawyers and he has lectured frequently on labor topics for the American Bar
Association, the Practicing Law Institute and other organizations.
P. Casey Pitts is an associate at Altshuler Berzon LLP. He is a graduate of Yale College and
Yale Law School, where he was a director of the Rebellious Lawyering Conference, managing editor of
the Yale Journal of Law and Feminism, and a senior editor of the Yale Law Journal. He served as a law
clerk to Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Daniel T. Purtell is a partner at Altshuler Berzon LLP. He is a graduate of Stanford University
and Stanford Law School. He served as a law clerk to Judge Harry Pregerson of the United States Court
of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. He is a contributing editor of The Developing Labor Law, and was a
member of the Editorial Board of Bender's California Labor & Employment Bulletin from 2002 to
2005. He also lectures frequently on issues of labor and employment law, particularly regarding ethical
issues that arise in representing individuals and labor unions.
Michael Rubin is a partner at Altshuler Berzon LLP. He is a graduate of Brandeis University
and the Georgetown University Law Center, where he was an editor of the Georgetown Law Journal.
He served as a law clerk to Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. of the United States Supreme Court during
the 1980 Supreme Court Term, and previously clerked for Chief Judge James R. Browning of the
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and Judge Charles B. Renfrew of the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California. Michael is a fellow of The College of Labor and
Employment Lawyers and is a member of the Board of Directors of the AFL-CIO=s Lawyers=
Michael has won an unprecedented four ACalifornia Lawyer of the Year@ (CLAY) awards from
California Lawyer Magazine, winning twice in the Employment Law Category (in 2013 for his
appellate work on Brinker v. Superior Court in the California Supreme Court, and in 2002 for his trial
work on the Saipan sweatshop litigation), once for False Claims Act Litigation (in 2010 his work
resulting in a $78 million settlement of fraud claims against the for-profit University of Phoenix), and
once for Criminal Law (also in 2010, based on more than a quarter century of work for a condemned
inmate that resulted in the inmate=s unconditional release from prison in 2010 B a case that also resulted
in Michael receiving the AJohnnie Cochran@ award from the Criminal Courts Bar Association). Michael
was also a 2003 recipient of a ATrial Lawyer of the Year@ Award from the Trial Lawyers for Public
Justice, for his work on the Saipan litigation.
Michael specializes in impact litigation, class actions, and appellate litigation, and has argued in
the U.S. Supreme Court and in many federal circuit courts of appeal and state supreme courts. For the
past several years, he has been listed in AThe Best Lawyers in America@ in the categories of appellate
law and labor and employment law, and in the Northern California ASuper Lawyers@ listings in the
areas of appellate practice, labor and employment, and class actions. He has also been listed by
Lawdragon Magazine as one of the ALawdragon 500 Leading Lawyers in America,@ one of the
ALawdragon 500 Leading Litigators in America,@ and one of the ALawdragon 500 Leading Plaintiffs=
Lawyers in America.@ He regularly lectures on developments in California and federal employment law
and other topics.
Peder J. Thoreen is a partner at Altshuler Berzon LLP. He is a graduate of Pomona College and
Yale Law School, where he was a Senior Editor of the Yale Law and Policy Review. He served as a
law clerk to Judge Harry Pregerson of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and
Judge Dean Pregerson of the United States District Court for the Central District of California. He is a
member of the Editorial Board of Bender's California Labor and Employment Bulletin.
Laura S. Trice is an associate at Altshuler Berzon LLP. She received a B.A. from Williams
College, an M.A. from Yale University, and a J.D. from New York University School of Law, where
she was a Notes Editor of the Law Review. She served as a law clerk to Judge David S. Tatel of the
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and to Judge Lucy H. Koh of the
United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
Jonathan Weissglass is a partner at Altshuler Berzon LLP. He is a graduate of Yale College and
Yale Law School, where he was an Articles Editor of the Yale Law Journal and a student director of the
Poverty Clinic. He served as a law clerk to Chief Judge Myron H. Thompson of the United States
District Court for the Middle District of Alabama and was a Karpatkin Fellow with the national legal
department of the American Civil Liberties Union in New York. He received the Voting Rights Award
from the ACLU of Southern California in 2002. In 2009, he was named a "California Lawyer Attorney
of the Year" by California Lawyer Magazine. In 2009 and 2013, he was named a "California Lawyer
Attorney of the Year" by California Lawyer Magazine.
Rachel J. Zwillinger is the Altshuler Berzon LLP-NRDC Joint Fellow. She is a graduate of
Princeton University and Stanford Law School, where she was Editor-in-Chief of the Stanford
Environmental Law Journal. She also received a M.S. from Stanford=s Emmett Interdisciplinary
Program in Environment and Resources. She served as a law clerk to Judge John T. Noonan of the
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and Judge Marilyn L. Huff of the United States
District Court for the Southern District of California.
CITATIONS TO PUBLISHED DECISIONS
The firm=s attorneys have participated in the following U.S. Supreme Court cases, as counsel
for either a party or an amicus: National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 132 S.Ct.
2566 (2012); Douglas v. Independent Living Center of Southern California, Inc., ___ U.S. ___, 132 S.
Ct. 1204 (2012); Granite Rock Co. v. Intl. Brotherhood of Teamsters, ___ U.S. ___, 130 S. Ct. 2847
(2010); Rent-A-Center, West v. Jackson, ___ U.S. ___, 130 5.ct.2772 (2010); Brunner v. Ohio
Republican Party, 555 U.S. 5 (2008); rev=g Chamber of Commerce v. Brown, 554 U.S. 60 (2008); rev=g
Chamber of Commerce v. Lockyer, 463 F.3d 1076 (9th Cir. 2006) (en banc); Long Island Care at
Home, Ltd. v. Coke, 551 U.S. 158 (2007); Orff v. United States, 545 U.S. 596 (2005); Dep=t of
Transportation v. Public Citizen, 541 U.S. 752 (2004); BE&K Construction Co. v. NLRB, 536 U.S.
516 (2002), on remand, 351 N.L.R.B. No. 29 (2007); Hoffman Plastic Compounds v. NLRB, 535 U.S.
137 (2002); EEOC v. Waffle House, 534 U.S. 279 (2001); Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly, 533 U.S.
525 (2001); Lujan v. G&G Fire Sprinklers, Inc., 532 U.S. 189 (2001); Circuit City Stores, Inc. v.
Adams, 532 U.S. 105 (2001); Sutton v. United Air Lines, Inc., 527 U.S. 471 (1999); Murphy Bros., Inc.
v. Michetti Pipe Stringing, Inc., 526 U.S. 344 (1999); Nat=l Fed=n of Federal Employees, Local 1309 v.
Dep=t of the Interior, 526 U.S. 86 (1999); Wright v. Universal Maritime Svc. Corp., 525 U.S. 70
(1998); Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998); Burlington Indus. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S.
742 (1998); Textron Lycoming Reciprocating Engine Division, Avco Corp. v. UAW, 523 U.S. 653
(1998); Allentown Mack Sales and Service, Inc. v. N.L.R.B., 522 U.S. 359 (1998); Bay Area Laundry
& Dry Cleaning Pension Trust Fund v. Ferbar Corp., 522 U.S. 192 (1997); Blessing v. Freestone, 520
U.S. 329 (1997); Calif. Dep=t of Industrial Relations v. Dillingham Construction, Inc., 519 U.S. 316
(1997); Walters v. Metropolitan Educ. Enterprises, 519 U.S. 202 (1997); Auciello Iron Works, Inc. v.
NLRB, 517 U.S. 781 (1996); United Food & Com. Workers v. Brown Group, 517 U.S. 544 (1996);
NLRB v. Town & Country Elec., Inc., 516 U.S. 85 (1995); McKennon v. Nashville Banner, 513 U.S.
352 (1995); Hawaiian Airlines v. Norris, 512 U.S. 246 (1994); Livadas v. Bradshaw, 512 U.S. 107
(1994); NLRB v. Health Care & Retirement Corp., 511 U.S. 571 (1994); ABF Freight System Inc. v.
NLRB, 510 U.S. 317 (1994); Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993);
Reno v. Catholic Social Services, 509 U.S. 43 (1993); District of Columbia v. Greater Washington Bd.
of Trade, 506 U.S. 125 (1992); Forsyth County v. Nationalist Movement, 505 U.S. 123 (1992); Gade v.
Natl. Solid Waste Management Ass=n, 505 U.S. 85 (1992); I.N.S. v. National Center for Immigrants=
Rights, 502 U.S. 183 (1991); Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp., 500 U.S. 20 (1991); UAW v.
Johnson Controls, Inc., 499 U.S. 187 (1991); ALPA v. O=Neill, 499 U.S. 65 (1991); i, 498 U.S. 479
(1991); United States v. Kokinda, 497 U.S. 720 (1990); Keller v. State Bar of Calif., 496 U.S. 1 (1990);
NLRB v. Curtin Matheson, 494 U.S. 775 (1989); Guidry v. Sheetmetal Workers, 493 U.S. 365 (1989);
Breininger v. Sheetmetal Workers Int=l Ass=n, 493 U.S. 67 (1989); Webster v. Reproductive Health
Services, 492 U.S. 490 (1989); Bd. of Trustees of SUNY v. Fox, 492 U.S. 469 (1989); Price
Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228 (1989); Frisby v. Schultz, 487 U.S. 474 (1988); Lingle v. Norge
Div. of Magic Chef, Inc., 486 U.S. 399 (1988); Edward J. DeBartolo Corp. v. Florida Gulf Coast Bldg.
& Constr. Trades Council, 485 U.S. 568 (1988); Board of Airport Commissioners v. Jews for Jesus,
Inc., 482 U.S. 569 (1987); Caterpillar, Inc. v. Williams, 482 U.S. 386 (1987); Fall River Dying &
Finishing Corp. v. NLRB, 482 U.S. 27 (1987); Fort Halifax Packing Co. v. Coyne, 482 U.S. 1 (1987);
Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. v. Buell, 480 U.S. 557 (1987); Calif. Federal Savings & Loan Ass=n
v. Guerra, 479 U.S. 1312 (1987); Baker v. General Motors Corp., 478 U.S. 21 (1986); Int=l Union,
UAW v. Brock, 477 U.S. 274 (1986); Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57 (1986); NLRB v.
Financial Institution Employees, 475 U.S. 192 (1986); Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Public Utilities
Comm., 475 U.S. 1 (1986); Pattern Makers= League v. NLRB, 473 U.S. 95 (1985); Ruckelshaus v.
Monsanto Co., 467 U.S. 986 (1984); Ellis v. Broth. of Ry. Airline & S.S. Clerks, 466 U.S. 435 (1984);
Arizona Governing Committee v. Norris, 463 U.S. 1073 (1983); Shaw v. Delta Airlines, 463 U.S. 85
(1983); Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co. v. EEOC, 462 U.S. 669 (1983); Bush v. Lucas,
462 U.S. 367 (1983); Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138 (1983); Knight v. Minnesota Community
College Faculty, 460 U.S. 1048 (1983); Bowen v. United States Postal Service, 459 U.S. 212 (1983);
Bd. of Educ. v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853 (1982); Heffron v. ISKCON, 452 U.S. 640 (1981); Donovan v.
Dewey, 452 U.S. 594 (1981); NLRB v. Retail Stores Employees Union, 447 U.S. 607 (1980);
Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins, 447 U.S. 74 (1980); Whirlpool Corp. v. Marshall, 445 U.S. 1
(1980); Babbitt v. United Farm Workers Nat=l Union, 442 U.S. 289 (1979); Cannon v. Univ. of
Chicago, 441 U.S. 677 (1979); N.Y. Telephone Co. v. N.Y. Labor Dep=t, 440 U.S. 519 (1979);
Hisquierdo v. Hisquierdo, 439 U.S. 572 (1979); City of Los Angeles v. Manhart, 435 U.S. 702 (1978).
The firm=s attorneys have also participated in the following cases in the Federal Courts of
Appeals: International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States Department of Transportation, 714
F.3d 580 (2013); Mulhall v. Unite Here Local 355, 667 F.3d 1211 (11th Cir. 2012); M.R. v. Dreyfus,
663 F.3d 1100 (9th Cir. 2011); Kairy v. SuperShuttle Intern., 660 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. 2011); Virginia ex
rel. Cuccinelli v. Sebelius, 656 F.3d 253 (4th Cir. 2011); Harris v. Quinn, 656 F.3d 692 (7th Cir. 2011);
Florida v. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Svcs., __ F.3d __ (11th Cir. 2011); Knox v. Cal. State
Employees Ass'n, 628 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010); Narayan v. EGL, Inc., 616 F.3d 895 (9th Cir. 2010);
Dominguez v. Schwarzenegger, 596 F.3d 1087 (9th Cir. 2010); Service Employees Intern. Union,
Local 5 v. City of Houston, 595 F.3d 588 (5th Cir. 2010); Veldechalam v. Tata America Intern. Corp.,
339 Fed.Appx. 761 (9th Cir. 2009); Glass v. UBS Financial Services, Inc., 331 Fed.Appx. 452 (9th Cir.
2009); The Sierra Club Foundation v. Department of Transportation, 563 F.3d 897 (9th Cir. 2009);
Morgan v. Family Dollar Stores, Inc., 551 F.3d 1233 (11th Cir. 2008); Adcock v. Freighliner, LLC, 550
F.3d 369 (4th Cir. 2008); Chicanos Por La Causa, Inc. v. Napolitano, 544 F.3d 976 (9th Cir. 2008);
Ohio Republican Party v. Brunner, 544 F.3d 711 (6th Cir. 2008) (en banc), rev=d, 555 U.S. 5 (2008);
Granite Rock Co. v. Int=l Bhd. of Teamsters, 546 F.3d 1169 (9th Cir. 2008), cert. granted; Golden Gate
Restaurant Ass=n v. City and County of San Francisco, 546 F.3d 639 (9th Cir. 2008) and 512 F.3d 1112
(9th Cir. 2008); In re Farmers Ins. Exchange Claims Representatives= Overtime Pay Litigation, 481
F.3d 1119 (9th Cir. 2007); In re Garabedd Melkonian Trust, 235 Fed.Appx. 404 (9th Cir. 2007);
Chamber of Commerce v. Lockyer, 463 F.3d 1076 (9th Cir. 2006) (en banc), rev=d sub nom Chamber
of Commerce v. Brown, 554 U.S. 60 (2008); United States v. Afshari, 446 F.3d 915 (9th Cir. 2006),
cert. denied sub nom Rahmani v. United States, 549 U.S. 1110 (2007); Eklund v. Byron Union School
District, 154 Fed. Appx. 648, 2005 WL 3086580 (9th Cir. 2005); Recon Refractory & Constr. Inc. v.
NLRB, 424 F.3d 980 (9th Cir. 2005); Horton v. Mayle, 408 F.3d 570 (9th Cir. 2005); Cummings v.
Connell, 402 F.3d 936 (9th Cir. 2005); Lopez-Alvarado v. Ashcroft; 381 F.3d 847 (9th Cir. 2004);
Assoc. Builders & Contractors v. Nunn, 356 F.3d 979 (9th Cir. 2004), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 814
(2004); Wagner v. Professional Engineers in California Gov=t, 354 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 2004); Harik v.
California Teachers Ass=n, 326 F.3d 1042 (9th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom Sheffield v. Aceves, 540
U.S. 965 (2003); Deutsch v. Turner Corp., 324 F.3d 692 (9th Cir. 2003); Simo v. Union of
Needletrades, Industrial & Textile Employees, 322 F.3d 602 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 873
(2003); Public Citizen v. Dep=t of Transportation, 316 F.3d 1002 (9th Cir. 2003), rev=d, 541 U.S. 752
(2004); Cummings v. Connell, 316 F.3d 886 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 539 U.S. 927 (2003); Conant v.
Walters, 309 F.3d 629 (9th Cir. 2002), aff=g Conant v. McCaffrey, 2000 WL 1281174 (N.D. Cal. 2000),
172 F.R.D. 681 (N.D. Cal. 1997), cert. denied sub nom Walters v. Conant, 540 U.S. 946 (2003);
Immigrant Assistance Project v. INS, 306 F.3d 842 (9th Cir. 2002); Steam Press Holdings, Inc. v.
Hawaii Teamsters and Allied Workers Union, Local 996, 302 F.3d 998 (9th Cir. 2002); Wininger v.
Boyden, 301 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2002); Prescott v. County of El Dorado, 298 F.3d 844 (9th Cir. 2002),
cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1188 (2003); Casumpang v. Int=l Longshoremen=s Local 142, 269 F.3d 1042 (9th
Cir. 2001), later proceeding Casumpang v. Int=l Longshore & Warehouse Union, Local 142, 361
F.Supp.2d 1195 (D. Hawaii 2005); Foster v. Mahdesian, 268 F.3d 689 (9th Cir. 2001), cert. denied, 535
U.S. 1112 (2002); BE&K Construction Co. v. NLRB, 246 F.3d 619 (6th Cir. 2001), rev=d, 536 U.S. 516
(2002); Petrochem Insulation v. NLRB, 240 F.3d 26 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 992 (2001);
Tosco Corp. v. Communities for a Better Environment, 236 F.3d 495 (9th Cir. 2001); Hoffman Plastic
Compounds, Inc. v. NLRB, 208 F.3d 229 (D.C. Cir. 2000), aff=d, 237 F.3d 639 (D.C. Cir. 2001) (en
banc), rev=d, 535 U.S. 137 (2002); Catholic Social Services v. INS, 232 F.3d 1139 (9th Cir. 2000) (en
banc); St. Thomas-St. John Hotel & Tourism Ass=n v. Gov=t of the U.S. Virgin Islands, 218 F.3d 232
(3rd Cir. 2000); Does I through XXIII v. Advanced Textile Corp., 214 F.3d 1058 (9th Cir. 2000);
Passantino v. Johnson & Johnson Consumer Products, Inc., 212 F.3d 493 (9th Cir. 2000); Burlington
Northern Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. Int=l Bhd. of Teamsters Local 174, 203 F.3d 703 (9th Cir. 2000) (en
banc); Aramark Corp. v. NLRB, 179 F.3d 872 (10th Cir. 1999) (en banc); U.S. Airways, Inc. v. Nat=l
Mediation Bd., 177 F.2d 985 (D.C. Cir. 1999); Retlaw Broadcasting Co. v. NLRB, 172 F.3d 660 (9th
Cir. 1999); Rosenberg v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc., 170 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 1999); CPS
Chem. Co. v. NLRB, 160 F.3d 150 (3d Cir. 1998); G&G Sprinklers, Inc. v. Bradshaw, 156 F.3d 893
(9th Cir. 1998), vacated and remanded, 526 U.S. 1061 (1999), on remand, 204 F.3d 941 (9th Cir.
2000), rev=d, 532 U.S. 189 (2001); Californians v. Mendonca, 152 F.3d 1184 (9th Cir. 1998); Tahara v.
Matson Terminals, Inc., 152 F.3d 929, 1998 WL 405855, 1998 U.S.App. LEXIS 15412 (9th Cir. 1998)
(mem. disp.); Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp., 150 F.3d 1011 (9th Cir. 1998); Duffield v. Robertson Stephens
& Co., 144 F.3d 1182 (9th Cir. 1998); Bennett v. Yoshina, 140 F.3d 1218 (9th Cir. 1998); McNealy v.
Caterpillar, Inc., 139 F.3d 1113 (7th Cir. 1998); San Antonio Comm. Hosp. v. S. Cal. Dist. Council of
Carpenters, 137 F.3d 1090 (9th Cir. 1997); McClatchy Newspapers, Inc. v. NLRB, 131 F.3d 1026
(D.C. Cir. 1998); Montero v. INS, 124 F.3d 381 (2d Cir. 1997); ConAgra v. NLRB, 117 F.3d 1435
(D.C. Cir. 1997); Pryner v. Tractor Supply Co., Inc., 109 F.3d 354 (7th Cir. 1997); Assoc. Builders &
Contrs., Inc. v. Local 302, IBEW, 109 F.3d 1353 (9th Cir. 1997); Beverly Enterprises-Pennsylvania,
Inc. v. District 1199C, 90 F.3d 93 (3rd Cir. 1996); Fry v. ALPA, 88 F.3d 831 (10th Cir. 1996); WSB
Electric, Inc. v. Curry, 88 F.3d 788 (9th Cir. 1996); United Ass=n of Journeymen & Apprentices v.
Reno, 73 F.3d 1134 (D.C. Cir. 1996); Chamber of Commerce v. Bragdon, 64 F.3d 497 (9th Cir. 1995);
Washington Service Contractors v. District of Columbia, 54 F.3d 811 (D.C. Cir. 1995); Legalization
Assistance Project v. INS, 50 F.3d 789 (9th Cir.1995); Maui Trucking v. Gen. Contractors Labor Ass=n,
37 F.3d 436 (9th Cir. 1994); Electromation, Inc. v. NLRB, 35 F.3d 1148 (7th Cir. 1993); Cannon v.
Edgar, 33 F.3d 880 (7th Cir. 1994); USS-POSCO Industries v. Contra Costa Bldg. & Constr. Trades
Council, 31 F.3d 800 (9th Cir. 1994); Wedges/Ledges, Inc. v. City of Phoenix, 24 F.3d 56 (9th Cir.
1994); Combined Management Inc. v. Superintendent of Insurance, 22 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 1994);
Employee Staffing Services, Inc. v. Aubry, 20 F.3d 1038 (9th Cir. 1994); Perales v. Thornburgh, 4 F.3d
99 (2d Cir. 1992); American Dental Ass=n v. Martin, 984 F.2d 823 (7th Cir. 1993); United Ass=n of
Journeymen v. Barr, 981 F.2d 1269 (D.C. Cir. 1992), vacating 768 F.Supp. 375 (D.D.C. 1991); Les v.
Reilly, 968 F.2d 985 (9th Cir. 1992); Shelby Cty. Health Care Corp. v. AFSCME Local 1733, 967 F.2d
1091 (6th Cir. 1992); Elec. Jt. Apprenticeship Comm. v. MacDonald, 949 F.2d 270 (9th Cir. 1991);
Kidwell v. Transportation Communication Int=l Union, 946 F.2d 283 (4th Cir. 1991); Int=l Broth. of
Electrical Workers v. Eichleay Corp., 944 F.2d 1047 (3rd Cir. 1991); Colorado-Ute Elec. Ass=n v.
NLRB, 939 F.2d 1392 (10th Cir. 1991); California Rural Legal Assistance v. Legal Service Corp., 937
F.2d 465, 917 F.2d 1171 (9th Cir. 1991); Toledo Typographical Union No. 63 v. NLRB, 907 F.2d 1220
(D.C. Cir. 1990); Indianapolis Power & Light Co. v. NLRB, 898 F.2d 524 (7th Cir. 1990); U.S. Postal
Service v. APWU, 893 F.2d 1117 (9th Cir. 1990); Hydrostorage v. Northern California Boilermakers,
891 F.2d 719 (9th Cir. 1989); News/Sun Sentinel Co. v. NLRB, 890 F.2d 430 (D.C. Cir. 1989);
National Posters, Inc. v. NLRB, 885 F.2d 175 (4th Cir. 1989); NLRB v. Parents and Friends of the
Specialized Learning Center, 879 F.2d 1442 (7th Cir. 1989); In re Thornburgh, 869 F.2d 1503 (D.C.
Cir. 1989); Stache v. Int=l Union of Bricklayers, 852 F.2d 1231 (9th Cir. 1988); Patel v. Quality Inn
South, 846 F.2d 700 (11th Cir. 1988); NLRB v. Ashkenazy Property Management Corp., 817 F.2d 75
(9th Cir. 1987); UAW v. Brock, 816 F.2d 761 (D.C. Cir. 1987); Local 512, Warehouse and Office
Workers= Union v. NLRB (Felbro), 795 F.2d 705 (9th Cir. 1986); IBEW, Local 387 v. NLRB (Arizona
Public Service Co.), 788 F.2d 1412 (9th Cir. 1986); AFSCME v. State of Washington, 770 F.2d 1401
(9th Cir. 1985); Calif. Hospital Ass=n v. Henning, 770 F.2d 856 (9th Cir. 1985); >White v. City of
Richmond, 713 F.2d 458 (9th Cir. 1983); Hawaiian Telephone Co. v. Hawaii Dep=t of Labor &
Industrial Relations, 691 F.2d 905 (9th Cir. 1982), earlier proceeding, 614 F.2d 1197 (9th Cir. 1980);
Spain v. Mountanos, 690 F.2d 742 (9th Cir. 1982); Gary W. v. State of La., 622 F.2d 804 (5th Cir.
1980); Gates v. Collier, 616 F.2d 1268 (5th Cir. 1980).
In the federal district courts, the firm=s cases have included the following: Narayan v. EGL,
Inc., 285 F.R.D. 473 (N.D. Cal. 2012); Oster v. Lightbourne, 2012 WL 685808 (N.D. Cal. March 2,
2012); Carrillo v. Schneider Logistics, Inc., 2012 WL 556309 (C.D. Cal. Jan 31, 2012); Carrillo v.
Schneider Logistics, Inc., 2011 WL 6104839 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 7, 2011); San Francisco Baykeeper v.
West Bay Sanitary Dist., 2011 WL 6012936 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 1, 2011); Carrillo v. Schneider Logistics,
Inc., 823 F.Supp.2d 1040 (2011); United Food and Commercial Workers Local 99 v. Brewer, 817
F.Supp.2d 1118 (D. Ariz. 2011), 2011 WL 4801887 (D. Ariz. Oct. 11, 2011), __ F.Supp.2d __, 2013
WL 1289781 (D. Ariz. Mar. 29, 2013); Copello v. Boehringer Ingelheim, 2011 WL 3325857 (N.D. Ill.
Nov. 2, 2011); M.R. v. Dreyfus, 767 F.Supp.2d 1149, (W.D.Wash. 2011); Southern Wine + Spirits Co.
v. Simpkins, 2011 WL 124631 (S.D. Fla. Jan. 14, 2011); Dimenco v. Service Employees Int'l Union,
2011 WL 89999 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 10, 2011); M.R. v. Dreyfus , 2011 WL 31553 (W.D.Wash. Jan 05,
2011) (NO. C10-2052Z); Common Cause of Colorado v. Buescher, 2010 WL 4537073 (D. Colo.
Nov. 3, 2010) and 2010 WL 4156486 (D. Colo. Oct. 18, 2010); Dominguez v. Schwarzenegger, 2010
WL 3447691 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 30, 2010) and 2010 WL 2673715 (N.D. Cal. July 2, 2010) and 2010 WL
2348659 (N.D. Cal. June 8, 2010); Danieli v. IBM, 2010 WL 2399329 (S.D. N.Y. Mar. 29, 2010); V.L.
v. Wagner, 669 F.Supp.2d 1106 (N.D. Cal. 2009); Martinez v. Schwarzenegger, 2009 WL 3353227
(N.D. Cal. Oct. 15, 2009) and 2009 WL 1844989 (June 26, 2009); The OSO Group v. Bullock &
Assoc., 2009 WL 2422285 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 6, 2009); NRDC v. Kempthorne, 627 F. Supp.2d 1212
(E.D. Cal. 2009) and 2009 WL 1575208 (E.D. Cal. June 3, 2009) and 2008 WL 5054115 (E.D. Cal.
Nov. 19, 2008); Veliz v. Cintas Corp., 2009 WL 1107702 (N.D. Cal. 2009); New United Motor Mfg.,
Inc. v. United Auto Workers, Local 2244, 184 L.R.R.M. 2539, 2008 WL 2540702 (N.D.Cal. June 19,
2008); Pacific Coast Fed=n of Fishermen=s Ass=ns v. Gutierrez, 2008 WL 2223070 (E.D. Cal. May 20,
2008), subsequent proceeding, 2008 WL 2851568 (E.D. Cal. July 18, 2008); United States ex rel.
UNITE HERE v. Cintas Corp., 2008 WL 1767039 (N.D. Cal. April 16, 2008), appeal pending, Ninth
Circuit Appeal No. 08-16223; McCabe Hamilton & Renny Co., Ltd. v. Int=l Longshore & Warehouse
Union, Local 142, 557 F.Supp.2d 1171 (D. Haw. 2008); Service Employees Int=l Union v. City of
Houston, 542 F.Supp.2d 617 (S.D. Tex. 2008); Knox v. Westly, 183 L.R.R.M. 3232, 2008 WL 850128
(E.D.Cal. March 28, 2008); Arizona Contractors Ass=n, Inc. v. Candelaria, 534 F. Supp.2d 1036 (D.
Ariz. 2008), aff=d sub nom Chicanos Por La Causa, Inc. v. Napolitano, 544 F.3d 976 (9th Cir. 2008);
Golden Gate Restaurant Ass=n v. City and County of San Francisco, 42 Employee Benefits Cases 2185,
2007 WL 4570521 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 26, 2007), rev=d, 546 F.3d 639 (9th Cir. 2008); Arizona Contractors
Ass=n, Inc. v. Napolitano, 526 F.Supp.2d 968 (D. Ariz. 2007), later proceeding Arizona Contractors
Ass=n, Inc. v. Candelaria, 534 F. Supp.2d 1036 (D. Ariz. 2008), aff=d sub nom Chicanos Por La Causa,
Inc. v. Napolitano, 544 F.3d 976 (9th Cir. 2008); Fusi v. Emery World Airlines, Inc., 183 L.R.R.M.
2225, 2007 WL 4207863 (S.D. Ohio 2007); AFL-CIO v. Chertoff, 552 F.Supp.2d 999 (N.D. Cal.
2007); In re American Family Mut. Ins. Co. Overtime Pay Litigation, 155 Labor Cases & 35,353, 2007
WL 2936319 (D. Colo. 2007); Int=l Longshore & Warehouse Union, Local 142 v. C. Brewer & Co.,
496 F.Supp.2d 1179 (D. Hawaii 2007); SkyWest Pilots ALPA Org. Comm. v. SkyWest Airlines, Inc.,
2007 WL 1848678, 182 L.R.R.M. 2485 (N.D. Cal. 2007); Adams v. Inter-Con Security Systems, Inc.,
242 F.R.D. 530, 2007 WL 1089694 (N.D. Cal. 2007); Chao v. Allied Pilots Ass=n, 2007 WL 518586,
181 L.R.R.M. 2578 (N.D. Tex. 2007); Adcock v. United Auto Workers, 2006 WL 3257044, 180
L.R.R.M. 3291 (W.D.N.C. 2006); Knox v. Westly, 2006 WL 2374763, 180 L.R.R.M. 3170 (E.D. Cal.
2006), earlier proceeding, 2005 WL 3031622 (E.D. Cal. 2005), subsequent proceedings, 2007 WL
516263, 181 L.R.R.M. 2501 (E.D. Cal. 2007), 2006 WL 3147683 (E.C. Cal. 2006); Vega v. Contract
Cleaning Maintenance, 2006 WL 1554383, 11 Wage & Hour Cas.2d 1121 (N.D. Ill. 2006); Patterson v.
Heartland Industrial Partners, LLP, 428 F.Supp.2d 714 (N.D. Ohio 2006), earlier proceeding, 225
F.R.D. 204 (N.D. Ohio 2004); Darensburg v. Metropolitan Transportation Comm=n, 2006 WL 167657
(N.D. Cal. 2006); NRDC v. Rodgers, 381 F.Supp.2d 1212 (E.D. Cal. 2005), motion for reconsideration
denied, 2005 WL 2466067 (E.D. Cal. 2005), earlier proceeding, 2005 WL 1388671 (E.D. Cal. 2005);
Rachford v. Air Line Pilots Ass=n, Int=l, 375 F.Supp.2d 908 (N.D. Cal. 2005), later proceeding, 2006
WL 927742 (N.D. Cal. 2006), aff=d mem., 284 Fed.Appx. 473 (9th Cir. 2008); Casumpang v. Int=l
Longshore & Warehouse Union, Local 142, 361 F.Supp.2d 1195 (D. Hawaii 2005), subsequent
proceeding, 411 F.Supp.2d 1201 (D. Hawaii 2005); Patel v. Sugen, Inc., 354 F.Supp.2d 1098 (N.D.
Cal. 2005); In re Farmers Ins. Exchange Claims Representatives= Overtime Pay Litigation, 300
F.Supp.2d 1020 (D. Ore. 2003), amended, 336 F.Supp.2d 1077 (D. Ore. 2004), aff=d in part and rev=d in
part, and remanded, 466 F.3d 853 (9th Cir. 2006), later proceeding, 14 Wage & Hour Cas.2d 356, 2008
WL 4763029 (D. Ore. Oct. 28, 2008); Cummings v. Connell, 281 F.Supp.2d 1187 (E.D. Cal. 2003),
rev=d, 402 F.3d 936 (9th Cir. 2005), later proceeding, 2006 WL 1716160, 180 L.R.R.M. 2159 (E.D.
Cal. 2006); SEIU Local 87 et al. v. SEIU Local 1877, 230 F.Supp.2d 1099 (N.D. Cal. 2002); Does I v.
Gap, Inc., 2002 WL 1000068 (D.N.M.I. 2002), related proceeding, 1000073 (D.N.M.I. 2002); Chamber
of Commerce v. Lockyer, 225 F.Supp.2d 1199 (C.D.Cal. 2002), rev=d, 463 F.3d 1076 (9th Cir. 2006)
(en banc); Common Cause v. Jones, 213 F.Supp.2d 1110, 213 F.Supp.2d 1116 (C.D. Cal. 2002);
Catholic Social Services v. Ashcroft, 206 F.R.D. 654 (E.D. Cal. 2002); In re World War II Era
Japanese Forced Labor Litigation, 164 F.Supp.2d 1153 (N.D. Cal. 2001), 114 F.Supp. 939 (N.D. Cal.
2000); Does I v. Advance Textile Corp., 2001 WL 1842389 (D.N.M.I. 2001); NRDC v. Whitman, 53
E.R.C. 1673, 2001 WL 1221774 (N.D. Cal.), later proceeding, 2001 WL 1456783 (N.D. Cal. 2001),
appeal dism. sub nom NRDC v. EPA, 35 Fed.Appx. 590, 2002 WL 1042092 (9th Cir. 2002); Eller
Media Co. v. City of Oakland, 2000 WL 33376585 (N.D. Cal. 2000), earlier proceedings, 1998 WL
827426 (N.D. Cal. 1998), 1998 WL 549494 (N.D. Cal. 1998); CF&I Steel, L.P. v. Bay Area Rapid
Transit District, 2000 WL 1375277 (N.D. Cal. 2000); Chadwick v. IBEW, 2000 WL 1006373 (N.D.
Cal. 2000); Friedman v. Cal. State Employees Ass=n, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7049, 163 L.R.R.M. 2924
(E.D. Cal. 2000); Foster v. Garcy, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21876, 140 Lab. Cas. (CCH) & 58,914 (N.D.
Cal. 1999); Tosco v. Communities for a Better Environment, 41 F.Supp.2d 1061 (C.D. Cal. 1999);
Bishop v. Air Line Pilots Ass=n, 159 L.R.R.M. 2005, 1998 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 11948 (N.D. Cal. 1998),
aff=d mem., 2000 US App. LEXIS 3270 (9th Cir. March 1, 2000); Martens v. Smith Barney, Inc., 181
F.R.D. 243, 1998 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 9226, 77 FEP Cas. (BNA) 532 (S.D.N.Y. 1998); Catholic Social
Services v. Reno, 1998 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 10429, 10430, 10431 (E.D. Cal. 1998); Sims v.
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit Dist., 2 F.Supp.2d 1253 (N.D. Cal. 1998); Cremin v. Merrill Lynch, 957
F.Supp. 1460 (N.D. Ill. 1997); McLendon v. Continental Group, Inc., 872 F.Supp. 142 (D.N.J. 1994);
Ford v. New United Motors Mfg., Inc., 857 F.Supp. 707 (N.D. Cal. 1994); Alameda Newspapers, Inc.
v. City of Oakland, 860 F.Supp. 1428 (N.D. Cal. 1994); Sneede v. Coye, 856 F.Supp. 526 (N.D. Cal.
1994); In re Gulf USA Corp., 171 Bankr. 379 (D. Id. 1994); Auvil v. CBS, 60 Minutes, 800 F.Supp.
928 (E.D. Wash. 1992); Cardona v. Oakland Unified School District, 785 F.Supp. 837 (N.D. Cal.
1992); Assoc. Builders & Contrs. v. BACA, 769 F.Supp. 1537 (N.D. Cal. 1991); EEOC v. Tortilleria
ALa Mejor,@ 758 F.Supp. 585 (E.D. Cal. 1991); Akau v. Tel-A-Com Hawaii, Inc., 1990 Dist. LEXIS
4647 (D. Hawaii 1990); Puzz v. U.S. Dep=t of the Interior, 1989 Dist. LEXIS 16649 (N.D. Cal 1989);
Local 3 v. Masonry & Tile Contractors Ass=n, 136 L.R.R.M. 2319 (D. Nev. 1990); Calif. ex rel. Van de
Kamp v. Reilly, 750 F.Supp. 433 (E.D. Cal. 1990); Local 1564 v. City of Clovis, 735 F.Supp. 999
(D.N.M. 1990); Immigrant Assistance Project v. INS, 709 F.Supp. 998 (W.D. Wash. 1989) aff=d, 976
F.2d 1198 (9th Cir. 1993), vacated and remanded, 510 U.S. 594 (1993); Ayuda, Inc. v. Barr, 687
F.Supp. 650 (D.D.C. 1988), rev=d in part, 880 F.2d 1325 (D.C. Cir. 1989), vacated and remanded, 498
U.S. 1117 (1991), on remand, 948 F.2d 742 (D.D.C. 1991), 700 F.Supp 49 (D.D.C. 1988), 744 F.Supp
21 (D.D.C. 1990), stayed, 919 F.2d 153 (D.C. Cir. 1990), rev=d, 948 F.2d 742 (D.C. Cir. 1991), vacated
and remanded, 509 U.S. 916 (1993), on remand, 7 F.3d 246 (D.C. Cir. 1993), pet. for rehearing denied,
14 F.3d 61 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 815 (1994); Bower v. Bunker Hill Company, 675 F.Supp.
1263, 675 F.Supp. 1254, 114 F.R.D. 587 (E.D. Wash. 1986), 689 F.Supp. 1032 (E.D. Wash. 1985); Int=l
Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftsmen v. Meese, 616 F.Supp. 1387 (N.D.Cal. 1985); Adolph
Coors Co. v. Sickler, 608 F.Supp. 1417 (C.D. Cal. 1985); Int=l Union, UAW v. Donovan, 570 F.Supp.
210 (D.D.C. 1983), rev=d, 746 F.2d 855 (D.C. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 825 (1985); Int=l
Union, UAW v. Donovan, 568 F.Supp. 1047 (D.D.C. 1983), rev=d, 746 F.2d 839 (D.C. Cir. 1984),
rev=d sub nom Int=l Union, UAW v. Brock, 477 U.S. 274 (1986), on remand, 816 F.2d 761 (D.C. Cir.
1987); Int=l Union, UAW v. Donovan, 554 F.Supp. 1172 (D.D.C. 1983); La Raza Unida v. Volpe, 545
F.Supp. 36 (N.D. Cal. 1982); AFL-CIO v. Marshall, 494 F.Supp. 971 (D.D.C. 1980).
The firm has also participated in the following state supreme court cases, among others: County
of Los Angeles v. Los Angeles County Employee Relations Commission, 56 Cal.4th 905 (2013);
United Teachers of Los Angeles v. Los Angeles Unified School District, 54 Cal.4th 504 (2012);
Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court, 53 Cal.4th 1004 (2012); California Grocers Ass'n v. City
of Los Angeles, 52 Cal.4th 177 (2011); Professional Engineers in California Gov=t v. Schwarzenegger,
50 Cal.4th 989 (2010); St. John=s Well Child and Family Center v. Schwarzenegger, 50 Cal.4th 960
(2010); Hawaii Gov=t Employees Assn. v. Lingle, 239 P3d 1 (Haw. 2010); City of San Jose v.
Operating Engineers Local No. 3, 49 Cal 597 (2010); Pearson Dental Supplies, Inc. v. Superior Court,
48 Cal.4th 665 (2010); Amalgamated Transit Union v. Superior Court, 46 Cal.4th 993 (2009); Sheehan
v. The San Francisco 49ers, Ltd., 45 Cal.4th 992 (2009); Vasquez v. State of California, 45 Cal.4th 243
(2008); State ex rel. Colvin v. Brunner, 120 Ohio St.3d 110, 896 N.E.2d 979 (Ohio 2008); EPIC v.
Calif. Dep=t of Forestry & Fire Protection, 44 Cal.4th 459 (2008); In re Marriage Cases, 43 Cal.4th 757
(2008); Gentry v. Superior Court, 42 Cal.4th 443 (2007); Fleischman v. Protect Our City, 214 Ariz.
406, 153 P.3d 1035 (2007); Tahara v. Matson Terminals, Inc., 111 Hawaii 16, 136 P.3d 904 (2006);
Reynolds v. Bement, 36 Cal.4th 1075 (2005); City of Long Beach v. Dep=t of Industrial Relations, 34
Cal.4th 942 (2004), vacating 110 Cal.App.4th 636, 1 Cal.Rptr.3d 837 (2003); AFL-CIO v. Hood, 885
So.2d 373 (Fla. 2004); Intel Corp. v. Hamidi, 30 Cal.4th 1342 (2003); Viner v. Sweet, 30 Cal.4th 1232
(2003); Hamilton v. Maryland Casualty Co., 27 Cal.4th 718 (2002); Golden Gateway Center v. Golden
Gateway Tenants Assoc., 26 Cal.4th 1013 (2001); Gerawan Farming, Inc. v. Lyons, 24 Cal.4th 468
(2000); Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Svcs., 24 Cal.4th 83 (2000); Morillion v. Royal
Packing Co., 22 Cal.4th 575 (2000); Cel-Tech Communications, Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular
Telephone Co., 20 Cal.4th 243 (1999); Hawaii State AFL-CIO v. Yoshina, 935 P.2d 89 (Haw. 1997);
Masonry & Tile Contractors Ass=n v. Jolley, Urga & Wirth, 941 P.2d 486 (Nev. 1997); People ex rel.
Lundgren v. Superior Court (American Standard), 14 Cal.4th 294 (1996); AFL-CIO v. Unemployment
Insurance Appeals Board, 13 Cal.4th 1017 (1996), rev=g 38 Cal.App.4th 1205 (1995); People v. Horton,
11 Cal.4th 1068 (1996); Southern Calif. Chapter of Assoc. Builders & Contractors Inc. v. Calif.
Apprenticeship Council, 4 Cal.4th 422 (1992); In re Horton, 54 Cal.3d 82 (1991); Cumero v. Public
Employment Relations Board, 49 Cal.3d 575 (1989); Keller v. State Bar, 47 Cal.3d 1152 (1989);
DeTomaso v. Pan American World Airways, 43 Cal.3d 517 (1987); County of Los Angeles v. State of
Calif., 43 Cal.3d 46 (1987); Long Beach City Employees Ass=n v. City of Long Beach, 41 Cal.3d 937
(1986); Regents of the University of Calif. v. Public Employment Relations Board, 41 Cal.3d 601
(1986); San Jose Teachers Ass=n v. Superior Court, 38 Cal.3d 839 (1985); AFL-CIO v. Eu, 36 Cal.3d
687 (1984); Legislature of the State of Calif. v. Deukmejian, 34 Cal.3d 658 (1983); San Mateo City
School Dist. v. Public Employment Relations Bd., 33 Cal.3d 850 (1983); Welfare Rights Org. v.
Crisan, 33 Cal.3d 766 (1983); Serrano v. Unruh, 32 Cal.3d 621 (1982); Mandel v. Myers, 29 Cal.3d
531 (1981); Pacific Legal Foundation v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Bd., 29 Cal.3d 101 (1981);
Sears Roebuck & Co. v. San Diego County District Council of Carpenters, 25 Cal.3d 317 (1979);
Robins v. Pruneyard Shopping Center , 23 Cal.3d 899 (1979).
The firm has also participated in the following cases in the state courts of appeal, among others:
Gonzalez v. Downtown L.A. Motors LP, 215 Cal.App.4th 36 (2013); California Teachers Ass’n v.
Governing Bd. of Salinas City Elementary Sch. Dist., H033788, 2013 WL 2707211 (Cal. Ct. App. June
14, 2013); Reed v. United Teachers Los Angeles, 208 Cal.App.4th 322 (2012); Hensel Phelps Const.
Co. v. San Diego Unified Port Dist., 197 Cal.App.4th 1020 (2011); California Chamber of Commerce
v. Brown, 196 Cal.App.4th 233 (2011); County of Los Angeles v. Los Angeles County Employee
Relations Com'n, 192 Cal.App.4th 1409 (2011); Ralph's Grocery v. United Food and Commercial
Workers, 192 Cal.App.4th 200 (2011); Home Depot v. Superior Ct., 191 Cal.App.4th 210 (2011); EPIC
v. Cal. Dept. of Forestry and Fire Protection, 190 Cal.App.4th 217 (2010); Bright v. 99 Cents Only
Stores, 189 Cal.App.4th 1472 (2010); Lazarin v. Superior Court, 188 Cal.App.4th 1560 (2010); Sutter
Health v. UNITE-HERE, 186 Cal.App.4th 1193 (2010); Gardner v. Schwarzenegger, 178 Cal.App.4th
1366 (2009); In re Consumer Privacy Cases, 175 Cal.App.4th 545 (2009); County of Sonoma v.
Superior Court, 173 Cal.App.4th 322 (2009); Aguiar v. Superior Court (Cintas Corp.), 170 Cal.App.4th
313 (2009); Project Vote v. Madison County Bd. of Elections, 2008 WL 4445176 (Ohio Sept. 29,
2008); Curley v. Lake County Bd. of Elections and Registration, 896 N.E.2d 24 (Ind. App. 2008);
Amaral v. Cintas Corp. No. 2, 163 Cal.App.4th 1157 (2008); Sharp v. Next Entertainment, Inc., 163
Cal.App.4th 410 (2008); State Building and Construction Trades Council of California v. Duncan, 162
Cal.App.4th 289 (2008); Kashmiri v. Regents of the University of Calif., 156 Cal.App.4th 809 (2007);
Sheet Metal Workers Int=l Ass=n, Local Union No. 104 v. Rea, 153 Cal.App.4th 1071 (2007); Aguiar v.
Cintas Corp. No. 2, 144 Cal.App.4th 121 (2006); Southern California Edison Co. v. Public Utilities
Comm=n, 140 Cal.App.4th 1085 (2006); The Hess Collection Winery v. California Agricultural
Relations Bd., 140 Cal.App.4th 1584 (2006); Du Charme v. Int=l Bhd. of Electrical Workers, Local 45,
110 Cal.App.4th 107 (2003); SEIU v. Superior Court, 89 Cal.App.4th 1390 (2001); Bell v. Farmers Ins.
Exchange, 87 Cal.App.4th 805 (2001), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 1041 (2001), later proceeding, 115
Cal.App.4th 715 (2004), later proceeding, 135 Cal.App.4th 1138 (2006), later proceeding, 137
Cal.App.4th 835 (2006); United Farm Workers v. Dutra Farms, 83 Cal.App.4th 1146 (2000); Western
Crop Protection Assoc. v. Davis, 80 Cal.App.4th 741 (2000); Pulaski v. California Occupational Safety
and Health Standards Board, 75 Cal.App.4th 1315 (1999); IBEW Local 595 v. Superior Court, 54
Cal.App.4th 1291 (1997); IBEW v. Aubry, 41 Cal.App.4th 1632 (1996); Calif. Court Reporters Ass=n
v. Judicial Council of Calif., 39 Cal.App.4th 15 (1995), 59 Cal.App.4th 959 (1997); L.A. County Court
Reporters Ass=n v. Superior Court, 31 Cal.App.4th 403 (1995); Smith v. Superior Court (Degnan), 31
Cal.App.4th 205 (1994); AFL-CIO v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, 23 Cal.App.4th 51
(1994); Calif. Labor Federation v. Calif. Safety and Health Standards Board, 5 Cal.App.4th 985 (1991),
221 Cal.App.3d 1547 (1990); Jerabek v. Public Employment Relations Bd., 2 Cal.App.4th 1298 (1991);
Zambrano v. Oakland Unified School Dist., 229 Cal.App.3d 802 (1991); Rust v. Vallejo, 215
Cal.App.3d 771 (1989); AFL-CIO v. Deukmejian, 212 Cal.App.3d 425 (1989); Wallace v. Consumers
Cooperative, Inc., 170 Cal.App.3d 836 (1985); Filipino Accountants Ass=n, Inc. v. State Board of
Accountancy, 155 Cal.App.3d 1023 (1984); Brown v. Superior Court, 137 Cal.App.3d 778 (1982);
Serrano v. Priest, 131 Cal.App.3d 188 (1982); AFL-CIO v. Employment Development Dep=t, 88
Cal.App.3d 811 (1979).
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?