Calif. High Court Ruling Changes Class Action Landscape


“There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.” The California Supreme Court could have been channeling Mark Twain when it rejected, emphatically, the unbridled use of statistical sampling to prove liability in a class action wage and hour case. In a unanimous decision, California’s high court in Duran v. U.S. Bank National Association gave the heave-ho to the kind of “trial by formula” that has become a feature of modern-day wage and hour litigation.

At the same time, the state high court restored some sanity to class action litigation more generally. While it might be tempting to view Duran as strictly an employment case, the far-reaching implications for class actions across the board cannot be overstated. Practitioners should review their existing California state and federal class actions and evaluate whether Duran can be used to their advantage.

Originally published in Law360 on June 16, 2014.

Please see full article below for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Topics:  Class Action, Employer Liability Issues, Statistical Sampling, U.S. Bank National Association, Wage and Hour, Wages

Published In: Civil Procedure Updates, Labor & Employment Updates

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Morrison & Foerster LLP | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »