As wage and hour litigation continues to be the majority of litigation in the workplace law arena, many employers are faced with defending federal and state law claims in the same federal court lawsuit. This poses a practical issue as the FLSA provides for an opt-in class while state laws generally provide for opt-out classes.
Class Actions
Supreme Court Reinforces Its Shady Grove Ruling Limiting Application Of State Procedural Waiver Requirements In Federal Court Actions
By Noel P. Tripp on
Posted in Class Actions
On the heels of its ruling in Shady Grove regarding the inapplicability of state procedural rules in federal court (discussed here), on April 19, 2010, the Supreme Court issued a decision reviving another dismissed class action. In Holster v. Gatco Inc., Case Number 08-1307, the Court granted the appeal petition of an individual…
Another New York Federal Court Compels Arbitration of Individual Claims
By Noel P. Tripp on
Posted in Class Actions
In the Second Circuit, employees generally can waive their right to bring a class or collective action as long as the cost of arbitrating the case on an individual basis is not cost-prohibitive and does not “remov[e] the plaintiff’s only reasonably feasible means of recovery.” See In Re American Express Merchants’ Litigation, 554 F.3d…
Supreme Court Expands Relief Available in New York State Law Class Actions Filed In Federal Court
By Noel P. Tripp on
Posted in Class Actions, New York State
The Supreme Court dealt a blow to New York wage-and-hour defendants sued in federal court last week, overruling established precedent requiring plaintiffs bringing New York Labor Law (“Labor Law”) class actions in federal court to waive the 25% liquidated damages “penalty” in order to proceed on a class basis. In Shady Grove Orthopedic Assocs., P.A. …
The Fine Line: What Can You Say To Potential Class Members After The Company Is Sued
By Noel P. Tripp on
Posted in Class Actions
In 1981, the Supreme Court issued general guidance as to what an employer can say to “putative class members” In doing so, the Court explained that the judiciary has the power to control communications See generally Gulf Oil v. Bernard, 452 U.S. 89 (1981) (holding a district court has both the “duty and broad authority…