Ogletree Deakins Drives New Complaint Against Landmark Labor Law
"AB 5 has implications that go beyond employment classification in California," Ogletree Deakins partner Robert Roginson said in a statement.
November 12, 2019 at 06:10 PM
4 minute read
Attorneys at the management-side firm Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart will lead a federal legal challenge to California's new worker classification law on behalf of the state's trucking industry.
In an amended complaint filed Tuesday, the California Trucking Association and two independent truckers asked the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of California to block enforcement of Assembly Bill 5. The law, set to take effect Jan. 1, will make it more difficult for companies to label workers as employees.
The complaint asks the court to carve out an exemption from the new rules for trucking companies and truckers; it does not ask for the entire law to be struck down.
"AB 5 has implications that go beyond employment classification in California," Ogletree Deakins partner Robert Roginson, an attorney for the trucking association, said in a prepared statement.
"With more than 350,000 independent owner-operators registered in the United States, the new test imposes an impermissible burden on interstate commerce under the U.S. Constitution's commerce clause and infringes upon decades-old congressional intent to prevent states from regulating the rates, routes and services of the trucking industry," said Roginson, the firm's managing shareholder in Los Angeles.
The lawsuit is one of the first legal challenges to the law, which codifies much of the California Supreme Court's 2018 ruling in Dynamex Operations West v. Superior Court. Lyft, Uber, DoorDash and Instacart announced last month that they will pursue a 2020 ballot initiative to carve out an exemption to the law for app-based drivers.
Truckers were some of the most clamorous opponents of AB 5 this summer, circling the Capitol in their rigs and blaring their horns. Independent truckers who own their own rigs say the new law will cost them flexibility and the money they've invested in their trucks. Shipping companies argued that having to hire drivers, train them and provide trucks will push up costs.
AB 5′s author, Lorena Gonzalez, D-San Diego, said in August that many independent-contractor truckers work for one company and don't set their pay rates. "Those are employees," she said.
The lawsuit by the California Trucking Association argues that California's new law is barred under the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution as well as federal statutes that give the federal government authority over commercial motor vehicle operating rules.
"The Dynamex decision and now AB 5 put plaintiffs in an impossible bind," Ogletree Deakins partner Alexander Chemers wrote in the complaint. "CTA's motor-carrier members must either completely revamp their traditional business model, and change the prices, routes, and services that they offer their customers, or risk criminal and civil liability" under state law.
The complaint filed Tuesday is an amended version of a lawsuit the trucking association filed last year challenging the worker classification test created by Dynamex. The substantially similar amended complaint now addresses language in AB 5.
Read more:
Sacramento Firm Drafts Ballot Initiative Challenging Landmark Labor Law
Gig Companies Set Lobbying Records Amid Fight Against Landmark Labor Bill
Gavin Newsom Is Delivering for Plaintiffs Lawyers, Labor Advocates
Newsom Signs Landmark Gig Labor Bill, as Court Cases Loom
As California Passes Landmark Worker Rights Bill, a Familiar Foe Takes Aim at Uber
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllInvoking Trump, AG Bonta Reminds Lawyers of Duties to Noncitizens in Plea Dealing
4 minute readCalifornia's Chief Justice Starts Third Year With Questions About Fires, Trump and AI
4 minute readWillkie Farr & Gallagher Drives Legal Challenge for Uber Against State's Rideshare Laws
5 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250