TITLE

Applebee's Argument Crumbles; Workers' Right to Band Together in Court Stands

AUTHOR(S)
Williams, Cynthia
PUB. DATE
March 2015
SOURCE
Public Citizen News;Mar/Apr2015, Vol. 35 Issue 2, p1
SOURCE TYPE
Periodical
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
The article reports that New York restaurant workers with support from the nonprofit organization Public Citizen have sued restaurant chain Applebee's franchise operator T.L. Cannon Corp. in federal district court for violating the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York labor law. It states that Public Citizen successfully appealed the decision of the court to deny the employees' motion to proceed as a class action in the case Roach v. T.L. Cannon Corp.
ACCESSION #
101880335

 

Related Articles

  • High Court's Walmart ruling good news for employers.  // HR Specialist: Florida Employment Law;Sep2011, Vol. 6 Issue 9, p1 

    The article reports on the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that the lawsuit on behalf of 1.5 million female employees of Wal-Mart Stores Inc. cannot proceed as a single class-action case which makes it harder for employees to band together in a class-action cases against employers in the U.S.

  • Credit Suisse Hit with $24B Class Action Suit. M. S. // Bank Loan Report;1/11/2010, Vol. 25 Issue 2, p1 

    The article reports on the 24 billion dollars class action lawsuit filed against the financial services group Credit Suisse Group AG on January 3, 2010 at the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho. It notes that investors in four luxury resorts filed the lawsuit, which accuses the firm...

  • Expert Testimony in Class-Certification Decisions. Eslick, Matthew R. // Proof;Summer2009, Vol. 17 Issue 4, p3 

    The article deals with the use of expert testimony in class-certification decisions in the U.S. Based on the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, district courts are required to determine early on in a putative class action whether to certify the proposed class. Among the factors that the proponent...

  • NFB / CARDTRONICS SETTLEMENT.  // Braille Monitor;Jul2010, Vol. 53 Issue 7, p504 

    The article discusses a court case wherein the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts approved a class action settlement between plaintiffs, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the National Federation of the Blind (NFB) and several blind persons, and defendants, Cardtronics Inc....

  • WITHOUT A LEG TO STAND ON? CLASS REPRESENTATIVES, FEDERAL COURTS, AND STANDING DESIDERATA. DeVougas, Daniel D. // Cornell Law Review;Mar2012, Vol. 97 Issue 3, p627 

    Class action litigation has become increasingly prominent within the last decade. Observing this reality, this Note explores an emerging trend at the district court level--specifically, that federal courts appear to be scrutinizing the standing of class representatives to decrease litigation...

  • British Airways: Lost Luggage Class Action.  // Travel Law Quarterly;Jun2009, Vol. 1 Issue 2, p118 

    The article reports on the ruling of U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis regarding the class-action lawsuit filed by the passengers of British Airways PLC (BA). It states that the ruling denied BA's motion to dismiss the consumer class action which seeks to recover travellers' actual losses...

  • Arbiter Does Not Decide Class Arbitration Status. McLeod, Catherine R. // CADS Report;Winter2015, Vol. 25 Issue 2, p23 

    The article discusses the Opalinski v. Robert Half International, Inc. court case in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit concluded that classwide arbitration status should be determined by the court, not by an arbitrator. It notes that the Third Court joined the Sixth Circuit...

  • Eleventh Circuit: Rule 68 Offers of Full Relief to Named Plaintiffs Do Not Moot a Class Action. Rich, Kimberly F. // CADS Report;Winter2015, Vol. 25 Issue 2, p27 

    The article discusses a court case wherein the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 offers of full relief to named plaintiffs do not moot a class action. It notes that in its Stein opinion, the Eleventh Circuit aligned with four other...

  • Divided California Supreme Court Limits Impact of Proposition 64 on Class Actions Brought Under California's Unfair Competition Law.  // Venulex Legal Summaries;2009 Q2, following p3 

    The article discusses the divided opinion of the California Supreme Court in In re Tobacco II Litigation, which construes the limitations imposed by the Proposition 64 on the ability of a plaintiff to bring a deceptive advertising class action under the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) of the state....

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of THE LIBRARY OF VIRGINIA

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics