California Supreme Court
Sep. 20, 2012
State high court to hear class sampling case
The court will decide whether statistical evidence can establish liability or damages when the employer has substantial evidence that many members of the class in fact are not entitled to relief. By George S. Howard of Jones Day
George S. Howard Jr.
Partner, Quarles & Brady
George Howard is a partner at Quarles & Brady's San Diego office. George has advised employers for more than 40 years, representing them in virtually every type of employment or labor dispute. He was the first San Diegan admitted as a fellow of the College of Labor and Employment Lawyers and for many years has been recognized by Chambers USA.
The state Supreme Court's decision in Brinker v. Superior Court, 53 Cal. 4th 1004 (2012), clarified an employer's obligations for meal and rest periods. But the court now will decide a potentially even more significant issue: how should a wage and hour misclassification case be tried? To what extent may "representative" testimony, sampling or statistical proof be used to establish an employer's liability? ...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In