TSC Staff Faces Allegations They Failed to Pay Overtime in California Class Action

In recent news, The Service Companies/TSC Staff face allegations of wage and hour violations in a recent California class action lawsuit.

The Case: Oscar Almanza v. The Service Companies, Inc. dba TSC Staff

The Court: Los Angeles County Superior Court of the State of California.

The Case No.: 24STCV01889

The Plaintiffs: Almanza v. The Service Companies, Inc. dba TSC Staff

The plaintiff in the case, Almanza, filed a class action complaint against The Service Companies, Inc. dba TSC Staff. According to court documents, the plaintiff claims the defendant failed to provide workers with meal and rest breaks required by labor laws.

The Defendant: Almanza v. The Service Companies, Inc. dba TSC Staff

The defendant in the case, The Service Companies, Inc. dba TSC Staff, allegedly failed to provide meal and rest breaks to employees. According to the class action lawsuit, the defendant allegedly violated numerous California Labor Codes (§§ 201, 202, 203, 204, 210, 226.7, 510, 512, 558, 1194, 1197, 1197.1, 1198, and 2802). The allegations include:

  • failing to pay minimum wage

  • failing to pay overtime wages

  • failure to provide required meal and rest periods

  • failing to reimburse workers for required work expenses

  • failing to provide accurate itemized wage statements

  • failing to provide wages when due

The Case: Almanza v. The Service Companies, Inc. dba TSC Staff

Due to strenuous work schedules, the defendant’s employees were allegedly unable to take off-duty breaks, and during the off-duty breaks they did take, they were not fully relieved from their work duties. According to the class action lawsuit, workers were sometimes required to work more than four hours without a ten-minute rest period. Additionally, the plaintiffs claim that due to understaffing, the staff that was scheduled tended to be overburdened, so from time to time, The Service Companies, Inc. dba TSC Staff denied employees their first rest periods of 10 minutes (minimum) for shifts from 2-4 hours, both first and second rest periods during shifts between 6-8 hours, and first, second, and third rest breaks during shifts lasting ten or more hours. When employees did not receive their rest periods, the company allegedly failed to provide them one hour of wages in place of the break as labor law requires. The case, Almanza v. The Service Companies, Inc. dba TSC Staff, is currently pending in the Los Angeles County Superior Court of the State of California.

If you have questions about how to file a California wage and hour lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw L.L.P. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Did Heritage Bank Violate Wage and Hour Laws?

In recent news, Heritage Bank faces a class action lawsuit. The case was filed under the California Private Attorney General Act of 2004 (PAGA) for wage and hour violations.

The Case: Nicole Demarinis v. Heritage Bank of Commerce

The Court: Alameda County Superior Court

The Case No.: RG20080970

The Plaintiffs: Demarinis v. Heritage Bank

The plaintiffs in the case, Demarinis and Patire, are current and former Heritage Bank of Commerce employees. The plaintiffs brought the case under PAGA (California Private Attorneys General Act of 2004), claiming the company engaged in wage and hour Labor Code violations.

The Defendant: Demarinis v. Heritage Bank

The defendant in the case, Heritage Bank, put an arbitration agreement in place with the plaintiffs in which they waived their right to bring claims against each other in any class or representative proceeding. Heritage Bank argued that the denial of arbitration was erroneous because the waiver provision was enforceable for nonindividual PAGA claims.

The Case: Demarinis v. Heritage Bank

However, the court found that the provision violated public policy by requiring plaintiffs to abandon their right to bring PAGA claims. The Court of Appeal of the State of California First Appellate District Division Three affirmed the decision made by the trial court rejecting the bank’s argument to compel arbitration of the individual PAGA claims based on a waiver of the arbitration agreement. Additionally, the court found that the waiver provision’s nonseverablity clause and “poison pill” provision precluded severance of the unenforceable nonindividual PAGA claims waiver by stating that if the waiver provision is unenforceable, the full arbitration agreement is null and void. As a result, the court decided the unenforceability of the waiver provision rendered the entire agreement null and void, which affirmed the trial court’s decision to deny the motion to compel arbitration.

If you have questions about how to file a California wage and hour lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

BNSF Railway Company Faces Allegations of Toxic Diesel Exhaust Levels in Wrongful Death Lawsuit

Did BNSF Railway Company expose workers to toxic levels of diesel exhaust? A wrongful death lawsuit filed by the family of a deceased railway employee claims exposure on the job caused his terminal cancer.

The Case: Garner v. BNSF Railway Co.

The Court: Fourth Appellate District, State of California, Division One

The Case No.: CIVDS1720288

Garner appealed the trial court's decision. The Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division One, State of California, concluded that the trial court erred in excluding Garner's experts. The court held that the trial court's gatekeeping role is not to choose between competing expert opinions, and it does not involve weighing the persuasiveness of an expert's opinion, substituting its own opinion for the expert's opinion, or resolving scientific controversies. The court found that Garner's experts used their scientific judgment and expertise to evaluate the available data and determine whether to draw an inference of causation, which is a matter of informed judgment, not scientific methodology. The court reversed the orders and judgment and remanded the case to the trial court with instructions to enter new orders, denying BNSF's motions in limine.

The Plaintiff: Garner v. BNSF Railway Co.

The plaintiff in the case, Gary Garner, filed a wrongful death lawsuit alleging his father was exposed to toxic levels of diesel exhaust during his forty years working for BNSF Railway Co. According to the plaintiff, the toxicity on the job caused his father's non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and subsequent death. The plaintiff presented multiple experts discussing whether diesel exhaust and its constituents can cause cancer (including non-Hodgkin's lymphoma) and whether the exposure his father was subjected to at work caused his cancer.

The Defendant: Garner v. BNSF Railway Co.

The trial court granted the defendant's motion to exclude Garner's causation experts from the trial, finding that the science presented as a foundation for the expert reports was inadequate. According to the court, there was too great an analytical gap between the opinions of the experts and the data presented.

The Case: Garner v. BNSF Railway Co.

The California wrongful death lawsuit, Garner v. BNSF Railway Co., was dismissed before trial.

If you have questions about filing a California wrongful death lawsuit, please contact Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced wrongful death attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago

Appellate Court Revived a Wrongful Death Lawsuit Against Cleveland Clinic

The Appellate Court revived a wrongful death lawsuit filed by a former patient's widow, finding the County Judge wrongfully barred a physician from testifying regarding alleged substandard care.

The Case: Kittis v. Cleveland Clinic

The Court: Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas

The Case No.: CV-19-920144

The Plaintiff: Kittis v. Cleveland Clinic

Dennis Kittis was a 74-year-old retired U.S. Army veteran who worked at a General Motors factory and loved running. On January 4, 2018, Kittis went to Fairview Hospital with pain in his stomach. Doctors discovered his bowel was obstructed and performed surgery the next day. The Kittis v. Cleveland Clinic wrongful death lawsuit was filed by the widow of Dennis Kittis, who died days after undergoing bowel obstruction surgery at Fairview Hospital. The Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court Judge Ashley Kilbane barred a physician scheduled to testify regarding the alleged substandard care Kittis received from the doctors at Fairview following his bowel obstruction surgery. David Brooks was a physician at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston and a lecturer at Harvard Medical School. After barring the testimony, Judge Kilbane granted the Clinic's lawyers' request to rule in their favor, dismissing the case.

The Defendant: Kittis v. Cleveland Clinic

The defendant in the case, Cleveland Clinic, runs Fairview Hospital at 18101 Lorain Ave. in Cleveland. During court motions, lawyers for the Cleveland Clinic denied that any of their employees acted negligently. Additionally, they claim that no surgical intervention could have prevented Kittis' death.

The Case: Kittis v. Cleveland Clinic

The 8th Ohio District Court of Appeals revived the Kittis v. Cleveland Clinic wrongful death lawsuit filed by a woman whose husband died days after his bowel obstruction surgery at Fairview Hospital in January 2018. The case was reinstated following a unanimous appellate panel that found the Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court judge wrongly barred the physician intended to testify regarding the alleged substandard medical care.

If you have questions about how to file a California wrongful death lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced wrongful death attorneys are ready to help you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Cracker Barrel Faces Wage and Hour Violation Allegations

A wage and hour lawsuit alleges Cracker Barrel required their tipped employees to perform non-tip-producing job duties at the end of their shifts without providing them with minimum wage.

The Case: Frederick v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc.

The Court: Fresno County Superior Court of the State of California

The Case No.: 3:23-cv-00813

The Plaintiff: Frederick v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc.

The plaintiff in the case, Catherine D. Frederick, was an hourly tipped employee at a Cracker Barrel Old Country Store restaurant. During her time at the restaurant, Frederick claims the company expected tipped workers to complete job-related, untipped tasks before and after starting their shift while logged in as tipped workers and that workers were not compensated fairly for the untipped job duties. Frederick filed an FLSA multi-plaintiff action complaint demanding a jury trial seeking unpaid minimum wage and other damages.

The Defendant: Frederick v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc.

The defendant in the case, Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc., compensated the plaintiff and other similarly situated employees using a tip-credit compensation plan that compensated tipped employees at a sub-minimum wage hourly rate of pay and then crediting tips received during their shifts, which combined would meet the FLSA minimum wage requirements. However, the plaintiff claims that the company’s demands that workers clock in as “tipped workers” in the timekeeping system while completing untipped job duties before and after their regular shift starts violated labor law.

The Case: Frederick v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc.

In the case Frederick v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc., workers allege the popular restaurant and store paid them using a “tipped worker” timekeeping system while requiring them to complete untipped job duties. The plaintiff claims that Cracker Barrel enjoyed ill-gained profits at the expense of their employees. The unpaid wage claims of the plaintiff and similarly situated employees are unified through common theories of the Defendant’s FLSA violations.

If you have questions about filing a California wage and hour lawsuit, please contact Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Parents Filed Wrongful Death Lawsuit After Stockton Student Fatally Stabbed on Campus

The parents of a Stockton high school student who was stabbed to death by an intruder on campus filed a wrongful death lawsuit claiming the school failed to implement its own safety plans.

The Case: Reynaga v. Stockton Unified School District

The Court: San Diego County Superior Court of the State of California

The Case No.: STK-CV-UPI-2023-2710

The Plaintiff: Reynaga v. Stockton Unified School District

The plaintiffs in the case are the parents of slain Stockton high school student Alycia Reynaga. Alycia was murdered at Amos Alonzo Stagg High School in Stockton. The alleged suspect, Anthony Gray, drove into the high school parking lot in front of the school, entered the campus armed with a knife through an unlocked gate, and fatally stabbed Alycia Reynaga. The Reynaga family claims that Alycia's stabbing and subsequent death on the high school campus could have been avoided if the school district implemented consistent safety measures.

The Defendant: Reynaga v. Stockton Unified School District

Alycia's parents filed a negligence and wrongful death lawsuit against the Stockton Unified School District, former Superintendent John Ramirez, Jr., and Amos Alonzo Stagg High School Principal Brett Toliver after the death of their daughter on campus.

The Case: Reynaga v. Stockton Unified School District

The case was filed on March 3, 2023, in San Joaquin County Superior Court. According to the wrongful death complaint, the family alleges that the negligence of employees of Stockton Unified School District caused Reynaga's death. According to the lawsuit, the high school determined that very strong security measures were warranted before the incident but failed to implement its own safety plan. The wrongful death lawsuit claims not only serious negligence on the part of the school district board and administration but also designates the incident as part of a "systemic failure" to protect the students. The plaintiffs claim that the security on campus was reduced prior to the incident despite officials being aware for years that students needed additional protection on campus. The Stockton school where Reynaga was fatally stabbed increased security measures after two more incidences of campus intruders were reported.

If you have questions about how to file a California wrongful death lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw L.L.P. Experienced wrongful death attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Second Kratom Wrongful Death Lawsuit Filed in Cowlitz County

The second Kratom wrongful death lawsuit filed in Cowlitz County lists multiple defendants facing allegations that the product is dangerous and shouldn’t even be available on store shelves.

The Case: Rachel McKibban v. Jopen, LLC

The Court: Superior Court of the State of Washington in Cowlitz County

The Case No.: Case No. 23-2-01183-08

The Plaintiff: Rachel McKibban v. Jopen, LLC

The plaintiff in the case is Rachel McKibban, individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Jordan McKibban, deceased. Rachel filed the second kratom wrongful death lawsuit in Cowlitz County, Washington. The suit was filed in December 2023 following the tragic death of Jordan McKibban, 37 years old. Jordan McKibban was a dedicated, successful working man who loved his family, fishing, gardening, and cooking. He worked for an organic food distributor and enjoyed good health but struggled with pain in his hands and back, for which he turned to kratom for relief (including Whole Herbs capsules, Hush liquid shots, and the Cloud House powders). According to the lawsuit filed by Rachel McKibban, Jordan came home from work on April 5, 2022, and collapsed. His nephew discovered him unconscious. Paramedics rushed him to the hospital, where he was pronounced dead. The autopsy report lists mitragynine, a compound in kratom, as the cause of death.

The Defendant: Rachel McKibban v. Jopen, LLC

The defendants in the case include multiple manufacturers and sellers of kratom brands, including Whole Herbs kratom capsules, Hush Kratom liquid shots, and bulk kratom powder sold through Cloud House Vaporz (Texas limited liability company; LP IND., LLC, a Wyoming limited liability company; CAG HOLDINGS, LLC, a Wyoming limited liability company; RMH HOLDINGS, INC., a Wyoming corporation; OLISTICA, an unincorporated association; MIT THERAPY INC., an Idaho corporation; DURITY DISTRIBUTION, INC., an Idaho corporation; HUSH WORLDWIDE LLC, a Wyoming limited liability company; DRIP DROP DISTRO LLC, an Idaho limited liability company; BEDROCK MFG LLC, a Wyoming limited liability company; CLOUD HOUSE VAPORZ, INC., a Washington corporation; and JOHN & JANE DOES 1 THROUGH 10).

The plaintiff claims the defendants in the case must be held accountable for their role in McKibban’s kratom-induced death. McKibban’s wrongful death lawsuit brings attention to the growing number of deaths in the U.S. for which kratom is listed as the cause of death, citing 2023 research that finds kratom 63 times more deadly than other natural products available for consumer purchase.

The Case: Rachel McKibban v. Jopen, LLC

The case, Rachel McKibban v. Jopen, LLC, raises serious concerns about the kratom industry and the safety of consumers.

If you have questions about how to file a California wrongful death lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced wrongful death attorneys are ready to assist you in various law firm offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.