Labor And Employment Law

The class action lawsuit Cranton vs. Grossmont Hospital Corporation had exposed widespread wage-and-hour violations affecting thousands of non-exempt employees from 2018 to 2024. Plaintiffs Jacquelyn Cranton and Katrena Arnold had alleged that Grossmont Hospital required off-the-clock work, interrupted meal breaks, denied rest breaks, rounded time in the hospital’s favor, and excluded incentive pay from overtime calculations. Employees also had completed mandatory COVID-19 screenings before clocking in, which the hospital had not treated as compensable time. Cranton had also reported retaliation after raising break violations and safety concerns. The defense denied wrongdoing and argued employee choice, preemption, and constitutional challenges. After extensive negotiations with mediator Jeffrey Ross, the parties had reached a $5,950,000 class settlement, which the Court approved on August 9, 2024. The Court had found the agreement fair, reasonable, and adequate, noting high participation and zero objections.

Lashandra Parker-Nashid, a longtime Miami-Dade County Transit employee, sued the county in federal Court, alleging discrimination and retaliation under Title VII. She claimed the county fired her after forty-nine years of service because of her race, gender, and Muslim faith, and that the termination followed harassment and retaliation for prior complaints. Miami-Dade denied all allegations and argued she had not exhausted administrative remedies and that legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons drove the termination. After hearing testimony and reviewing evidence, the jury issued a verdict on November 14, 2025, finding that her religion was not a motivating factor in her discharge. The verdict ended deliberations and resulted in no monetary recovery for Ms. Parker-Nashid.

A group of employees had filed a class action against Southern California Permanente Medical Group and Kaiser Permanente International, accusing the organizations of violating California Labor Code §2802 by failing to reimburse mandatory business expenses. The Plaintiffs said they used personal phones, computers, vehicles, and home offices for work without proper repayment. These out-of-pocket costs created ongoing financial losses for hundreds of employees. The Defendants denied the allegations but moved into settlement discussions as the case progressed. On November 12, 2025, Judge Elaine Lu granted final approval of a $15,000,000 class action settlement. The agreement included attorney fees of $5,000,000, service awards of $5,000 for each named Plaintiff, and a $500,000 PAGA penalty divided between the LWDA and aggrieved employees. The settlement resolved all reimbursement claims and required distribution of funds to the affected class members.

The class action lawsuit, In re Sutter Health ERISA Litig. (Case No. 1:20-cv-01007), was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California on behalf of participants in the Sutter Health 403(b) Savings Plan. The plaintiffs alleged that Sutter Health and its fiduciaries breached their duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) by failing to leverage the Plan's size to obtain lower-cost investment options and by permitting the Plan to incur excessive recordkeeping and investment management fees. This mismanagement allegedly resulted in significant financial injury to approximately 73,000 current and former employee participants. The parties reached a negotiated agreement, and the court granted preliminary approval for a $4.3 million common fund settlement to resolve all claims of fiduciary breach.

The lawsuit brought by Kayla Vitela against Sizzling Platter, LLC and its Wingstop-affiliated entities centered on alleged statewide wage and hour violations affecting a large group of employees. Filed under the Private Attorneys General Act, the case claimed that workers were denied proper meal and rest breaks, given inaccurate wage statements, owed unpaid final wages, and left without reimbursement for necessary business expenses. The employer denied all allegations, but the risk of mounting penalties across numerous employees pushed the parties toward mediation. The action concluded with a $1.3 million settlement covering civil penalties, employee restitution, and substantial attorney fees, marking a significant outcome in favor of the aggrieved workers.

This employment lawsuit stemmed from Eric Jones’s request for workplace accommodations for a chronic skin condition and a prior shoulder injury while employed with the Los Angeles Unified School District. Jones argued that LAUSD ignored its legal duty to work with him through the interactive process and failed to provide reasonable accommodations, causing him financial and emotional harm. Although the jury rejected his retaliation claim, they concluded that the District’s failures under California’s FEHA laws directly caused damage. On July 2, 2025, the jury awarded Jones $300,000 in past and future lost earnings, confirming that LAUSD’s handling of his accommodation requests violated state disability protections.

Katrina Baptiste resolved her employment lawsuit against The City and County of San Francisco through a $125,000 settlement reached in June 2025. Baptiste had alleged severe workplace misconduct, including sexual and racial harassment, racial discrimination, and retaliation for reporting the misconduct. She claimed the hostile conditions caused emotional distress, financial loss, and professional harm. The City denied all allegations, asserting it responded properly and violated no laws. The settlement brought an end to nearly two years of litigation and allowed both sides to avoid the risks and burdens of a public trial

A years-long wage and hour class action, Geierman v. Grocery Delivery E-Services USA, Inc. (20CV361771), concluded in Santa Clara County with a $945,391 settlement benefiting thousands of current and former workers. The lawsuit alleged that the delivery company and its HR partner failed to provide lawful meal and rest breaks, misrecorded work hours, and issued non-compliant wage statements. Jennifer Geierman, representing the class, argued that systemic timekeeping and scheduling practices denied employees wages and penalties owed under California labor laws. The Defendants denied wrongdoing, asserting that employees controlled their breaks and that policies complied with state requirements. After extensive discovery and mediation, the parties reached a global settlement that compensates workers and mandates key operational changes, including updated timekeeping systems and clearer break policies. The resolution closes a major employment dispute in California’s gig-economy labor landscape.

In a landmark employment retaliation case, Dr. Kristen Wheldon, a respected clinical psychologist, reached a $5.75 million settlement with the City of Los Angeles after alleging whistleblower retaliation and workplace discrimination. Dr. Wheldon claimed city officials punished her for reporting serious ethical and procedural violations, leading to her demotion, isolation, and emotional distress. Her lawsuit cited violations under California’s Labor Code Section 1102.5 and the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). The City denied wrongdoing but agreed to the multimillion-dollar settlement before trial, marking a major victory for employee whistleblower protections in the public sector.

American Freight Management Company LLC resolved a wage-and-hour class action in Sacramento Superior Court by agreeing to a $398,620 settlement that compensated employees for unpaid overtime, missed meal breaks, and inaccurate wage statements. The case involved managers and hourly workers who said the company failed to include nondiscretionary bonuses in overtime rates, routinely delayed meal periods, and issued pay stubs that did not show correct hours or earnings. After extensive discovery, mediation, and class certification, both sides settled before trial. The agreement brought closure to claims stretching back to 2018 and delivered financial relief to affected workers across the company’s California retail locations.

A Sacramento jury delivered a sweeping verdict for Dr. Beth Fischgrund, concluding that the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation unlawfully retaliated against her after she reported workplace misconduct and safety issues. The jury found that Dr. Fischgrund’s protected whistleblower activity triggered a series of adverse employment actions, culminating in significant professional and personal harm. The panel also determined that CDCR defamed her during the conflict, further damaging her reputation and career prospects. After evaluating the evidence, the jury awarded a total of $13.88 million for lost earnings, future economic harm, emotional distress, and reputational damage. The case underscored the legal protections afforded to employees who report unsafe or improper governmental conduct in California.

A class action lawsuit against Pactrack, Inc., a California logistics company, ended in a $160,000 settlement in September 2024. Plaintiff Carmen Bustamante filed the case alleging that Pactrack failed to pay hourly workers for all hours worked, including overtime, and neglected to reimburse them for job-related expenses. The complaint also cited inaccurate pay stubs and violations of California labor laws. The Los Angeles Superior Court approved the settlement, providing financial relief to affected employees and resolving the wage and hour claims without trial.