Salamirad Morrow | Attorneys at Law

Ruvalcaba v. Clark Realty Win

December 30, 2014 | Posted by Jody Salamirad | Category: NewsNews Page - News

Congratulations to SMTD partner Michael Timpane and Edward Stepans for defeating a class action certification motion in Ruvalcaba, et al. v. Consolidated Concepts Inc., et al., Superior Court of California, County of Solano Case No. FCS 039248, on behalf of their surety client. Seventeen plaintiffs represented a class of over 120 roofers who worked on various projects constructing housing for military personnel at Army and Navy bases in California, and claimed that they were not paid the proper wages as required under federal and California law. After months of discovery, preparation and briefing, and a day-long hearing on the issue of whether the case should be certified as a class action, the court denied the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification on the basis that the plaintiffs did not show the claims could be better handled as a class as opposed to actions by the individual workers. The denial of class certification deals a crucial blow to the plaintiffs’ case because the action is now limited to just the named plaintiffs. A copy of the Court’s order denying certification is attached here.  Amended Order on Motion for Class Certification 11_19_2014 (130274484_1…

Comments
Post has no comments.
Post a Comment





Recent Posts

Categories

Subscribed successfully.
Email *

Ruvalcaba v. Clark Realty Win

December 30, 2014 | Posted by Jody Salamirad | Category: NewsNews Page - News

Congratulations to SMTD partner Michael Timpane and Edward Stepans for defeating a class action certification motion in Ruvalcaba, et al. v. Consolidated Concepts Inc., et al., Superior Court of California, County of Solano Case No. FCS 039248, on behalf of their surety client. Seventeen plaintiffs represented a class of over 120 roofers who worked on various projects constructing housing for military personnel at Army and Navy bases in California, and claimed that they were not paid the proper wages as required under federal and California law. After months of discovery, preparation and briefing, and a day-long hearing on the issue of whether the case should be certified as a class action, the court denied the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification on the basis that the plaintiffs did not show the claims could be better handled as a class as opposed to actions by the individual workers. The denial of class certification deals a crucial blow to the plaintiffs’ case because the action is now limited to just the named plaintiffs. A copy of the Court’s order denying certification is attached here.  Amended Order on Motion for Class Certification 11_19_2014 (130274484_1…

Comments
Post has no comments.
Post a Comment




top