 |
National Bank Wage and Hour
We defeated class certification of a case alleging all in store branch managers were misclassified and successfully resolved the named plaintiffs’ individual claim for nuisance value on the eve of trial.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Local 179, IBT v. TSC Enterprises, Inc.
National Bank Of Canada
In a case of first impression regarding what constituted an unlawful rolling notice, we defended TSC in a class action WARN claim that was filed in connection with TSC’s closure of a steel mill it purchased out of bankruptcy. The court granted summary judgment, finding that all notices issued by TSC complied with federal law.
|
|
|
|
|
|
UPIU v. Jefferson Smurfit Corporation
Smurfit Stone Container Corporation
We represented Jefferson Smurfit Corp. (JSC) in a class action filed by various unions and more than 3,500 retirees under ERISA and Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act challenging changes to JSC’s retiree medical benefits plan and the portion of the cost charged to retirees. The plaintiffs claimed oral and written labor contractual promises to provide lifetime benefits, as well as fraud and misrepresentation regarding the costs of the plan. After four years of massive discovery and many hard-fought pretrial battles, Winston & Strawn obtained judgment on all points for JSC on the eve of trial, saving our client more than $200 million in liability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Petersen, et al. v Marsh & McLennan, Mercer Consulting, et al.
Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.
Rebecca Petersen brought the suit on behalf of herself and thousands of current and former employees of Mercer (U.S.) Inc. claiming that Mercer had misclassified her and the other purported class members as exempt from the overtime compensation. Winston & Strawn defeated the plaintiff’s initial efforts to conditionally certify a class of more then 1,700 current and former employees, forcing the plaintiff to seek representation of a significantly smaller class. The defeat of the plaintiff’s conditional certification efforts led directly to a favorable settlement for the client.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foodservice Distribution Company Wage and Hour Litigation
Winston successfully argued that because of the unique nature of the truck drivers at issue and the lack of records indicating a meal period was taken was insufficient to certify a class when substantial numbers of putative class members declared they were able to take meal and rest periods as needed, and were aware of the overall company policy encouraging drivers to do so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Entertainment Company Wage and Hour Litigation
Winston & Strawn is currently representing the largest live entertainment company in the world in a wage and hour class action in California including allegations of meal and rest break violations, failure to reimburse business expenses, and off-the-clock work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cruise and Event Company Wage and Hour Litigation
Winston & Strawn is currently representing a leading provider of on-board entertainment in a wage and hour class action in California that includes allegations of failure to pay overtime and expense reimbursement violations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nationwide Restaurant Chain Wage & Hour Litigation
Winston & Strawn is currently representing a nationwide restaurant chain in a California wage and hour class action including allegations of meal and rest period violations, off-the-clock work, expense reimbursement violations, and WARN violations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reddy v. MedQuist
MedQuist Inc.
We obtained summary judgment for MedQuist in a RICO lawsuit, seeking billions in damages, filed by a former employee in the Northern District of New Jersey. The lawsuit followed the company's announcement of findings of an independent review of customer billings and its de-listing from the NASDAQ stock exchange in 2004. The complaint was initially filed against MedQuist, its majority shareholder, Phillips, and certain current and former directors, and alleged numerous counts, most of which were dismissed at the pleading stage. The court then granted summary judgment on the remaining claims in favor of the company. Subsequently, the plaintiff tried to file a new action in the Southern District of California. However, the California district
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alday v. Jefferson Smurfit Corporation
Smurfit Stone Container Corporation
Winston & Strawn represented JSC in a nationwide class action lawsuit filed on behalf of thousands of salaried retirees who claimed that the company's changes to and increases in the cost charged for retiree medical benefits violated, inter alia, ERISA. After extensive discovery and briefs on the issue, the court refused to permit the plaintiffs to proceed with class-wide claims on issues relating to alleged oral and written representations concerning how retiree benefits would be treated. We succeeded in having the class decertified by taking scores of class member depositions-the members’ disparate understanding of their rights deprived the class representatives of key Rule 23 prerequisites. The surviving class claims of breach of fiducia
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blackwell v. Deluxe Corp.
Deluxe Corporation
We represented Deluxe in an ERISA class action in which the plaintiffs sought millions of dollars in damages in connection with the company’s failure to pay severance benefits after the sale of a business unit. The plaintiffs claimed breach of fiduciary duty, failure to pay benefits, Section 510 discrimination, fraud, and estoppel. We won summary judgment for our client on all counts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Friz v. Marsh & McLennan Companies Inc.
Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.
We represented Marsh & McLennan in an ERISA class action suit in which the plaintiffs sought millions of dollars in damages in connection with the administration of a severance pay plan. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the trial court's decision to grant summary judgment, dismissing the suit against our client.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tice v. American Airlines
American Airlines
After a seven-year battle waged through the federal trial and appellate courts, our attorneys secured dismissal of an ADEA class action filed by former pilots against client American Airlines, Inc. for alleged discrimination in disallowing their job bids to flight engineer positions. In response to American's motion for summary judgment, the plaintiffs made various assertions of rights under the applicable labor agreement as the underlying basis of their ADEA claim. American seized the opportunity to move to dismiss because contract-backed claims in the airline industry are the exclusive province of arbitral panels mandated by the Railway Labor Act. The Seventh Circuit decided to stay rather than dismiss the case, and the matter proceeded t
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hammond v. Wise Alloys
Wise Metals Group LLC
The firm won a motion to dismiss an ERISA class action suit brought against client Wise Alloys.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intervention, Inc. v. Blue Cross of California, Inc.
Wellpoint Health Networks, Inc.
We represented WellPoint in two unfair competition cases involving the alleged misclassification of multiple categories of employees, and challenging the administrative and professional exempt status of those employees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cokenour v. Household International, Inc., et al.
Household Interntional - Board of Direct
The firm represented Household International in a national class action brought in the Northern District of Illinois against our client alleging violations of ERISA related to the investment of plan assets in Company stock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anthony, et. al. v. American Airlines, et. al.
American Airlines
This purported class action involved former TWA flight attendants who claimed that their integration into the American Airlines system after the merger violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. We successfully defeated plaintiff's motion for class certification on the grounds that she failed to establish the causation and redressability elements of standing. The court held that the integration resulted not from any agreement between American and the flight attendants union, but because TWA had waived their unions' Allegheny-Mohawk rights during the TWA bankruptcy proceeding. The court also found that even if plaintiff prevailed on her age claim, the court could not award her the relief she sought, retroactive seniority. Therefore,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Farmers Insurance Wage & Hour Litigation
Farmers Group Inc.
Winston & Strawn represented Farmers Insurance Exchange in a multi-district litigation consolidating seven separate federal actions in which the plaintiffs alleged that Farmers improperly classified more than 6,100 of its current and former claims adjusters nationwide as exempt from the overtime pay requirements under the FLSA and various states’ laws. After a three-week bench trial, the court ruled that the insurance company had a complete defense to liability as to the plaintiffs’ federal FLSA claim for almost three years of the statutory period and that only limited categories of employees were entitled to back overtime pay. We then succeeded in obtaining an order requiring individual damages proceedings for each class member. Following
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blackwell v. SkyWest Airlines, Inc.
SkyWest Airlines Inc.
Winston & Strawn secured a significant victory for SkyWest Airlines, Inc. when the Southern District of California denied a former employees motion for class certification in a case filed as a wage and hour class action. The plaintiff asked the Southern District Court of California to certify a class of nearly 4,000 current and former SkyWest customer service agents in California into five subclasses, one for each of her various claims. The plaintiff alleged the airline violated state and federal laws by denying meal breaks, issuing inaccurate wage statements, imposing unlawful alternative workweek schedules resulting in unpaid overtime, refusing to pay overtime for voluntary shift trades, and deducting wages to pay for travel benefits with
|
|
|
|
|
|
Select A Region
Search for an attorney.
