3 Firms Seek $10M in Fees in McDonald's Labor Class Settlement
Altshuler Berzon, Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll and the Matern Law Group are the three firms spearheading the lawsuit.
November 25, 2019 at 03:38 PM
3 minute read
Three plaintiffs firms could get up to $10.1 million in legal fees and expenses as part of a proposed $26 million settlement that would resolve allegations McDonald's underpaid California workers.
A third of the settlement would go to legal fees, and up to another $1.5 million would cover litigation expenses, according to the proposal filed in Los Angeles Superior Court Friday.
The plaintiffs are represented by Michael Rubin, Barbara Chisholm and Amanda Lynch of Altshuler Berzon; Joseph Sellers of Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll; and Matthew Matern and Launa Adolph of the Matern Law Group. Cohen Milstein is regularly involved in some of the nation's largest class-action litigation and is among the firms vying for $77.5 million in fees in the Equifax data privacy class action in Atlanta.
The McDonald's lawsuit was initially filed in January 2013 and has gone through discovery and appeals since then.
A memorandum of understanding was reached in September after "years of fruitless stop-and-go settlement negotiations" as the plaintiffs were preparing for an appeal in the case, according to a declaration supporting the proposed settlement. That declaration said the negotiations were assisted by mediator Mark Rudy of Rudy, Exelrod, Zieff & Lowe.
A hearing on the proposed California settlement is scheduled for Dec. 3 before Judge Ann Jones. If approved, the settlement will resolve claims that McDonald's failed to pay regular and overtime wages, failed to pay employees their full pay when they left the company, and failed to provide time for meals and breaks.
The settlement also includes injunctive relief for the class. Within 60 days of the settlement being approved, McDonald's must create a mechanism to pay an hour of premium time to employees who are not allowed to take a full and timely break, and meal time under California law, according to the proposal. McDonald's must also allow employees to leave the restaurant on their break, track their break time, and provide new uniforms to employees when their old uniforms become worn or damaged.
McDonald's denied any wrongdoing in the settlement.
"While we continue to believe our employment practices comply with the California Labor Code, we have decided to resolve this lawsuit filed back in early 2013," McDonalds said in a statement Monday. "With this settlement, the parties have reached a mutually acceptable resolution and have submitted the settlement to the Court for its review and approval. McDonald's remains committed to our employees, and we continuously roll out additional trainings and resources across corporate-owned restaurants to promote continued compliance with all wage and hour laws."
The settlement came nearly two weeks after McDonald's was sued in Michigan for allegedly ignoring "pervasive" sexual harassment at its restaurants. Plaintiffs in that litigation are represented by Altshuler Berzon, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Michigan firm McKnight, Canzano, Smith, Radtke & Brault.
Alaina Lancaster contributed to this report from San Francisco.
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
© 2024 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 AllMike Lynch's Brush With Prison Taught Him Life Is Precious. Then a Yacht Accident Proved Him Right
Facing a Shrinking Talent Pool, Insurance Defense Firms Are Fighting to Add Attorneys
6 minute readAG Garland Calls Prosecuting Execs 'Greatest Deterrent' to Corporate Fraud
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1How to Support Law Firm Profitability: Train Partners Up
- 2Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 3Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 4Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 5X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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