|
|
|
CURRENT CASES Our docket currently includes: * The defense on appeal of a nation-wide injunction against a Department of Homeland Security regulation that would turn Social Security Administration "no-match" letters into an immigration-enforcement tool without authorization from Congress. * A federal court lawsuit seeking to enjoin an Arizona statute that usurps the federal government’s authority to regulate the employment of immigrants. * A challenge under the Fourteenth Amendment and federal and state civil rights laws to discrimination against low income minority communities in public transportation funding. * A First Amendment challenge to Houston ordinances that restrict parades, public gatherings in public parks, and the use of sound amplification equipment. * A constitutional challenge to a California statute that attempts to undermine a voter-approved initiative that mandates drug treatment and probation, instead of incarceration, for non-violent drug offenders. * Representation of a labor coalition in a Ninth Circuit appeal from a district court order invalidating on ERISA preemption grounds a San Francisco ordinance that requires employers either to provide health benifits to their employees or to pay into a City fund for the same purpose. * An appeal from a $17 million jury verdict against a labor union for defamation and trade libel resulting from a postcard advising prospective hospital patients of a labor dispute between the union and a laundry supplier to the hospitals. * The defense before the California Supreme Court of a trial court 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. * A state court environmental challenge to the government’s failure to consider the possible future impacts of global warming on a massive construction project on levees in the Sacramento – San Joaquin River Delta. * A state court class action against the University of California for improperly charging fee increases to tens of thousands of undergraduate, graduate and professional students. * A California Supreme Court amicus brief in support of the right to same-sex marriage under the California Constitution, drafted in conjunction with professors and students from the Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic. * A class action jury trial challenging an employer’s systematic underpayment of its workers in violation of the Los Angeles living wage ordinance. * A federal court class action alleging that a national electronics retailer discriminates against women and minorities in its hiring, promotion and compensation practices. * Federal court class actions alleging that two national financial services firms systematically discriminate against their Latino and African American women brokers. * A federal court class and collective action against an automobile manufacturing plant for failure to compensate its employees for donning and doffing protective gear, in violation of federal and state law. * The defense in the U.S. Supreme Court of a Ninth Circuit en banc decision rejecting First Amendment and federal preemption challenges to a California law that prohibits employers from using state funds to influence employees about union organizing. * A due process challenge to the State of California’s right to re-try a criminal defendant, in a 24-year old murder case, where the State’s delays in certifying the record and withholding evidence caused prejudice to defendant’s ability effectively to defend himself. * A federal court lawsuit on behalf of environmental and labor groups to block the Bush administration's attempt to allow Mexico-domiciled trucks to travel throughout the United States without complying with the specific congressional prerequisites governing such action. * A qui tam case against the world’s largest for-profit university alleging it falsely certified compliance with a provision of the federal Higher Education Act that prohibits payment of recruiters based upon the number of students they enroll. * A qui tam case against a nationwide industrial laundry company alleging it falsely represented that it would pay, and was paying, its employees the wages and benefits required by the Service Contract Act. * A federal court lawsuit on behalf of pilots to prohibit their employer from interfering with their rights to organize and to free expression under the Railway Labor Act and from funding a company union. * The defense on appeal of a class-action judgment in excess of $1.4 million against an employer that systematically underpaid its workers in violation of the City of Hayward’s living wage ordinance. * A federal environmental challenge to the impact on endangered species of fish of massive pumping of water from the San Francisco Bay delta to irrigation districts and urban water agencies. * A lawsuit against the Schwarzenegger administration for delays in adding substances to the list of chemicals in California that are known to cause cancer and reproductive harm. * A Hawaii federal court class action challenging the termination of retiree health insurance coverage of hundreds of former sugar and pineapple plantation workers. * A lawsuit seeking to establish that the California law that requires workers to be paid prevailing wages on public construction projects applies to projects undertaken by charter cities. * A federal court class action alleging that a restaurant chain discriminates against African-Americans in its hiring and job assignment practices. * A state court lawsuit challenging a national airline’s violation of California law by refusing to permit airline pilots to use their accrued paid sick leave to care for ill family members. * Class action challenges, proceeding in the Ninth Circuit, the Northern District of California, and AAA arbitration, to a nationwide industrial laundry company’s policy of classifying its drivers as exempt from the overtime requirements of federal and state wage-and-hour laws. * A California Supreme Court amicus brief on behalf of the AFL-CIO and the SEIU in an appeal of a lower court decision holding that labor unions may not bring representative actions on behalf of their members under the California Private Attorneys General Act and the California Unfair Competition Law. * An amicus brief in the California Court of Appeal in support of the position that the California Rules of Professional Responsibility do not preclude labor unions and other advocacy groups from helping to fund class action litigation. * A whistleblower retaliation jury trial on behalf of a California State University professor. * The 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. * A nationwide federal class action challenging a global security company’s failure to compensate employees for security briefings they are required to attend before the start of their shifts. * A nationwide FLSA, ERISA, and state law overtime class action challenging an insurance company’s treatment of its claims representatives as exempt "administrators". * The defense on appeal of a decision holding that a developer’s receipt of state low income housing tax credits requires the construction workers on the project to be paid prevailing wages. * Serving as lead class counsel in a state-wide class action on behalf of automotive shop personnel seeking payment for off-the-clock work and unpaid meal and rest breaks. * A federal court class action alleging that a major electronic design automation software company misclassified informational technology support workers as exempt from federal and state wage and hour laws. * Court challenges to several pharmaceutical companies’ failure to pay overtime compensation to their sales representatives. * A California consumer class action against a bank that misleadingly offers lines of credit without disclosing hidden costs and credit impacts. * The defense on appeal in the Fourth Circuit of a federal court decision 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. * A California Supreme Court appeal concerning whether plaintiffs seeking private attorney general fees are required to demonstrate, as condition of fee eligibility, that they made a reasonable effort to settle their dispute with defendants before filing their complaint. * The defense on appeal of federal district court order dismissing an employer’s unprecedented attempt to expand Section 301 of the LMRA to include tort theories for interference with contract by an international union. * An administrative challenge to the termination of a 20-year career attorney employed by the State of California, who had an exemplary record and was recognized as one of the state’s experts in wage and hour law, but was discharged for, inter alia, his public comments regarding agency policy. * An arbitration challenge to an employer’s policy of terminating ill or injured employees, in violation of its collective bargaining agreement. * The defense of a union’s collection of "fair share fees" from non-members against a challenge by the anti-union National Right to Work Foundation. * An amicus brief to the NLRB’s Division of Advice in support of the position that Section 7 of the NLRA protects workers’ right to pursue employment claims on a class or collective basis. 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 provide counsel on First Amendment issues to the Public Health Institute's Technical Assistance Legal Center (TALC), we defend public interest groups against SLAPP suits, and we represent law firms and public interest organizations on statutory and common fund attorneys' fees matters.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
