On July 15, 2024, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the Western District of Texas’s certification of a class of more than 290,000 participants in more than 3,000 plans that provide employee benefits through the Contractors and Employees Retirement Trust (CERT) and the Contractors Plan Trust (CPT). Defendants Fringe Benefit Group (FBG) and Fringe Insurance Benefits, Inc. (FIBI) operate these two trusts and provide administrative and marketing services to plans that participate in the trusts. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants have violated ERISA by controlling disbursements from the trusts (including payment of their own excessive fees), using this control to collect fees that were not explicitly agreed to by employer and were never disclosed to plan participants, and selecting service providers for the plans that maximized Defendants’ compensation at the expense of participants.

FJWW is proud to join the Asian Law Caucus and Rideshare Drivers United in representing Uber and Lyft drivers in proceedings regarding safety citations issued to the two rideshare companies by Cal-OSHA during the COVID-19 pandemic.

On April 4, 2023, Judge Mary Strobel of the Los Angeles County Superior Court denied a petition for writ of mandate filed by the California Hospital Association and Robert Vlach seeking to prevent a voter initiative regarding healthcare executives’ pay from reaching the ballot.

On January 18, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the validity of a Culver City ordinance giving workers at Southern California Hospital at Culver City a $5 per hour temporary pay increase in recognition and compensation for their work during the COVID pandemic, affirming the District Court’s order dismissing the Hospital’s claims.

The Ninth Circuit heard argument Monday in an appeal by Southern California Hospital at Culver City, which appealed from an order dismissing the Hospital’s legal challenge to a Culver City ordinance that entitled workers at the Hospital to a $5 per hour temporary pay increase in recognition and compensation for their work providing vital health care services to the community during the pandemic. As noted in a Law360 article, the panel “pressed” counsel for the Hospital regarding its arguments that the ordinance is preempted by the National Labor Relations Act or acted as a substantial impairment of the Hospital’s contracts with unions or staffing companies.

On November 21, 2022, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California granted preliminary approval to a proposed $4 million settlement with Defendant Alerus Financial, N.A.

On June 16, 2022, the Superior Court for the County of San Francisco granted final approval of a $1.85 million, non-reversionary class action settlement in Jensen v. California Physicians’ Service d/b/a Blue Shield of California (“Blue Shield”).

On April 13, 2022, the judgment in Foster v. Adams and Associates, Inc. (N.D. Cal. Case No. 18-02723-JSC) will become final and the settlement fund will be distributed to class members.

On December 13, 2021, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California denied a motion for summary judgment and denied in part a motion to dismiss by Defendants Kruse-Western, Inc., Kevin Kruse, and GreatBanc Trust Company in Zavala v. Kruse-Western, Inc., et al., No. 1:19-cv-00239-DAD-SKO.

As described in a Law360 article, “A Culver City, California, hazard pay ordinance for hospital workers was not an improper giveaway to organized labor and does not conflict with federal labor law, the city and a health care workers union have argued while urging the Ninth Circuit not to block the law.” Catha Worthman and Genevieve Casey represent SEIU-UHW, who have intervened in the case to defend the legal validity of the hazard pay ordinance and are asking the Ninth Circuit to affirm the trial court’s order denying the hospital’s motion for a preliminary injunction in this appeal, Southern California Healthcare System, Inc. v. City of Culver City, Case No. 21-55788. To view the full article, click here.