PASADENA, Calif. — Domino’s Pizza LLC filed an unopposed motion in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Feb. 25 to stay the issuance of mandate in a putative class complaint by truck drivers asserting violations of California’s labor and unfair competition laws pending its petition to the U.S. Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari.
PITTSBURGH — Putative class claims accusing a hotel management company of violating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by failing to ensure that beds and sleeping surfaces in accessible rooms comply with federal requirements may proceed despite no ADA standards that address sleeping surfaces, a federal judge in Pennsylvania ruled Feb. 4, opining that the lead plaintiffs has sufficiently alleged violation of the ADA’s “general accessibility mandate.”
PASADENA, Calif. — A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Feb. 15 denied a petition for rehearing by Domino’s Pizza LLC after the panel affirmed a trial court’s order denying the employer’s motion to compel arbitration in a putative class complaint by truck drivers asserting violations of California’s labor and unfair competition laws.
DAYTON, Ohio — A federal judge in Ohio on Feb. 9 granted preliminary approval to a $1.5 million settlement reached in a collective and class complaint by a pizza delivery driver accusing a pizza shop franchisee, her husband and her limited liability companies of improper reimbursement for vehicle expenses.
LOS ANGELES — One month after Domino’s Pizza LLC and a blind man declared that their settlement negotiations had ultimately failed, despite having previously announced a possible agreement to settle claims that the pizza chain’s website is not equally accessible to visually impaired patrons, the parties jointly filed a report in California federal court on Jan. 21 stating that they had agreed on a date of June 7 for a jury trial in the reopened dispute over application of the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) in cyberspace.
CHICAGO — Resolving multiple motions by the parties in a lawsuit over the “Law Tigers” trademark, an Illinois federal judge on Feb. 8 struck the defendant’s unclean hands affirmative defense related to purported franchise law violations, while permitting discovery and depositions on relevant topics such as the likelihood of confusion.
OKLAHOMA CITY — A federal judge in Oklahoma granted emergency care providers summary judgment on counterclaims alleging that a 36% upcoding rate constituted fraud but denied their motion alleging pretrial misconduct and seeking sanctions on Jan. 17.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — There is no “use-it-as-expeditiously-as-feasible-or-lose-it rule” when it comes to moving for arbitration so long as there is no violation of a clear deadline or prejudice to another pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), a Taco Bell franchisee argues in its respondent brief filed in a wage-and-hour dispute on Feb. 4 in the U.S. Supreme Court.
The journalists and staff of Mealey’s Litigation Reports are saddened by the passing of co-founder Michael P. Mealey. He was a respected member of the newsletter community, being named publisher of the year by the National Newsletter Association and president of the National Newsletter Association. Mike and Judy Mealey started Mealey Publications Inc. in 1984. As president, Mike grew the Mealey’s Litigation Report portfolio, introduced email news bulletins and electronic CD formats and launched a continuing legal education conference business. Mealey’s was sold to LexisNexis in 2000. We hope to carry on his journalistic curiosity and integrity in the titles we continue to publish today under his name.
RICHMOND, Va. — A group of Anytime Fitness franchise owners appealing from a Virginia federal district court’s dismissal of their first amended class action complaint seeking coverage for the negative impact on their business caused by government shutdown orders issued in response to the coronavirus pandemic told the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in their Jan. 10 opening brief that the district court misinterpreted both the provisions of the insurance policy and the applicable law.
ST. LOUIS — The Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Jan. 7 refused to weigh in on the merits of a Missouri judge’s stay of federal trademark infringement allegations by a window franchisor because the stay is neither a final order nor an appealable collateral interlocutory order.
FRESNO, Calif. — Just over a week after declining to preliminarily approve a $2 million wage statements class and Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) settlement by the operator of McDonald’s in California, a federal magistrate judge in California on Jan. 20 granted preliminary approval after the agreement and proposed class notice were revised, but noted concerns with the requested attorney fees.
SAN DIEGO — A federal judge in California on Jan. 12 dismissed a lawsuit by franchise interest groups and associations challenging the constitutionality of the state’s “ABC Test” to determine whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor, finding that the action was not ripe under Article III of the U.S. Constitution and that the constitutional claims fail on prudential ripeness grounds.
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A consent decree between two national car dealers and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission under which the dealers will pay $150,000 and hire a consultant to facilitate changes to their policies and training practices to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit was approved Jan. 19 by a federal judge in California.
PASADENA, Calif. — A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling affirming a trial court’s order denying Domino’s Pizza LLC’s motion to compel arbitration in a putative class complaint by truck drivers asserting violations of California’s labor and unfair competition laws conflicts with Ninth Circuit and U.S. Supreme Court precedent, Domino’s argues in a Jan. 20 petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc.
FRESNO, Calif. — A federal magistrate judge in California on Jan. 12 denied preliminary approval of a $2 million class and Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) settlement by the operator of McDonald’s in California, finding issues in the agreement and proposed notice.
CHICAGO — A federal judge in Illinois on Jan. 7 granted a businessowners insurer’s motion for summary judgment in its lawsuit disputing coverage for underlying claims that its insured violated the Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA), finding that the policy’s “employment related practices” (ERP) exclusion precluded coverage.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A McDonald’s franchisee violated the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) when it recalled or rehired employees who had been laid off due to the impact of the coronavirus pandemic except for four workers who participated in a union organizing campaign in 2019, a National Labor Relations Board administrative law judge (ALJ) ruled Dec. 30.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — American Association for Justice filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 5 supporting arguments by the employee of a Taco Bell franchisee who tells the high court in her Dec. 30 petitioner brief that her employer forfeited its right to arbitration after waiting to file its motion in her wage-and-hour case until after failed settlement talks and that the ruling by the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel majority must be reversed.
DENVER — A federal magistrate judge in Colorado on Jan. 3 directed the defendants in a lawsuit over an alleged carbon monoxide poisoning incident at a Boulder, Colo., hotel to turn over the list of guests during a weeklong period to three guests who filed a putative class complaint, rejecting the arguments by the franchisor, franchisee and other defendants that the guests’ privacy rights would be violated and that plaintiffs’ counsel may misuse the information.