Los Angeles Superior Court Approves $7.4 million Settlement for CVS Pharmacists
Schonbrun Seplow Harris & Hoffman LLP is pleased to announce that on February 2, 2016, the Honorable Judge Berle (Los Angeles Superior Court, Central Civil West Department 323) granted final approval to a $7.4 million class-action settlement on behalf of CVS pharmacists in regions 54, 65, and 74. Judge Berle's order, available here, effectively concludes litigation of three separate, region-specific actions: Connell v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., L.A.S.C. Case No. BC523172 (Region 65); Paksy v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., L.A.S.C. Case No. BC523491 (Region 54); and Bystrom v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., L.A.S.C. Case No. BC525991 (Region 74).
The proposed settlement of these three cases is part of a global settlement of all claims against CVS in California related to allegations that pharmacists worked more than six consecutive days without overtime. The total global settlement value for the five 7-Day Cases is $12,750,000, of which $7,461,600 (58.52%) was allocated for the settlement of claims involving regions 54, 65 and 74 (which accounted for approximately 58.52% of the alleged 7-day violations at issue throughout the state). The cases on behalf of pharmacists in CVS regions 60 and 73 are pending in federal court and therefore the motions for approval of those settlements for the balance of the global 7-Day Cases Settlement are being made before the federal courts. Uppal v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., United States District Court (N.D. Cal.) Case No. 3:14-cv-02629-VC is on behalf of CVS pharmacists in Region 73. Preliminary approval of the settlement in Uppal was granted on September 11, 2015 (order available here), and the final approval hearing is set for March 3, 2016. Sharobiem v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., United States District Court (C.D. Cal.) Case No. 2:13-cv-09426-GHK (FFM) is on behalf of CVS pharmacists in Region 60. The motion for preliminary approval in Sharobiem was granted on November 30, 2015 (order available here), and the final approval hearing is set for April 11, 2016. (Previously, on October 16, 2014, the Los Angeles Superior Court granted final approval of a similar settlement on behalf of CVS pharmacists in Region 72. Meneses v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., Los Angeles County Superior Court Case No. BC489739.)
Schonbrun Seplow Harris & Hoffman LLP wins class action appeal on behalf of nursing staff at California psychiatric hospitals.
In a published decision issued on October 16, 2015, the California Court of Appeal reversed a lower court ruling which had denied a motion for class certification on behalf of nursing staff at two Southern California psychiatric hospitals. The Court of Appeal, in the case of Valerie Alberts, et al. v. Aurora Behavioral Health Care, et al., No. B248748, found that the Plaintiffs had presented numerous issues common to the proposed class of nurses and mental health workers who allege that hospital policies and practices denied them meal and rest breaks and overtime compensation. The Plaintiffs presented evidence that the hospitals failed to provide sufficient staffing and coverage to allow nursing staff to take their legally required breaks and that staff were pressured to work "off the clock" so as not to sacrifice patient safety.
As the Court stated: "The Hospital's policies, as understood through the prism of plaintiffs' theory, effectively and unfairly leverage a reasonable nurse's ethical obligations, making missed break mandatory, not voluntary. A reasonable/ethical nurse under such circumstances would not risk the life or health of his/her patient suffering from a psychiatric disorder in order to take a mandated meal or rest break."
Michael D. Seplow of Schonbrun Seplow Harris & Hoffman LLP, lead counsel for the Plaintiffs, argued the case before the Court of Appeal.
Click here for a copy of the Court of Appeal's published and precedent-setting decision.
Beas v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company
Schonbrun Seplow Harris & Hoffman LLP is co lead counsel in a proposed class action lawsuit filed on April 24, 2014 seeking unpaid overtime on behalf of insurance adjusters who worked for Liberty Mutual or Golden Eagle after January 2005 (and who are not part of the settlement in the Harris v Liberty Mutual case) based on allegations that they were mis-classified as being exempt from overtime.
For more information about this case, please contact Michael D. Seplow or Aidan McGlaze. See the link for of the operative complaint. Beas Complaint
Boyd v Bank of America and Landsafe Inc., USDC Central District of California Case No. 13-CV-00561 DOC (JPRx)
Schonbrun Seplow Harris & Hoffman LLP, along with Bryan Schwartz Law, successfully represented a class of real estate appraisers in a federal class action lawsuit against Bank of America and LandSafe Inc.
In the Boyd case, the Court ruled that the residential real estate appraiser class was non-exempt under both California and federal law and that class members had been misclassified by Bank of America and Landsafe. Court order re summary judgment
Ian H. Stark v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., et al.,
Case No. BC476431
Walid Ibrahim v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., et al.,
Case No. BC489738
Hashem Heiati, et al. v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., et al.,
Case No. BC501118
Sandra Schwartz v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., et al.,
Case No. BC502723