Clark Law Group Employment Lawyer Consumer Lawyer

Clark Law Group

  • Clark Law Group Facebook
  • Clark Law Group Twitter
  • Clark Law Group Yelp
  • Clark Law Group Google Business Page
  • Clark Law Group LinkedIn

Information and materials on this website is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. This website is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship.

Current Cases

Have you been mistreated or taken advantage of as an employee or consumer?

No matter the size of the business, You are not alone and you deserve to know where you stand. View our current cases below, or contact us today. 

Alvarado v. Lewis Operating Corp. (34-2014-00159707)

  • Sacramento County Superior Court

  • Honorable David I. Brown

 

Case Summary: Plaintiff, in his representative capacity, alleges that while working for Defendant Lewis Operating Corp. in a building maintenance capacity, he and other employees were required to be on "standby" for one week out of the month. While on standby, Plaintiff alleges that employees were not paid for their time despite being required to take telephone calls and respond to requests in less than 30 minutes, and being prohibited from attending events that would prohibit them from responding to calls within 30 minutes.

Avila v. DirecTV, LLC (BC640701)

  • Los Angeles County Superior Court

  • Honorable Maren E. Nelson

 

Case Summary: Plaintiff, on behalf of other similar field service technicians, allege that while working for Defendant DirecTV, LLC, as a field service technician, he and other employees were not compensated for all the time spent to load and unload equipment from their company service vehicles at the beginning and end of each workday and the time between the end of required meetings and their schedule start times.

 

Beckman v. Arizona Canning Company, LLC (3:16-cv-02792-JAH-BLM)

  • United States District Court, Southern District of California 

  • Honorable John A. Houston

 

Case Summary: Plaintiffs, on behalf of other similar consumers, allege that Arizona Canning Company, LLC deceives consumers by selling Sun Vista whole bean products that are mostly filled with water.

Beckman v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. et al. (37-2017-00021869-CU-BC-CTL)

  • San Diego County Superior Court

  • Honorable Joel R. Wohlfeil

 

Case Summary: Plaintiff, on behalf of other similar consumers in California, allege that Defendants Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Espresso Supply, Inc., Eko Brands, LLC, and Ekobrew deceive customers by selling Brew & Save K-Cup Carafe Filters that are falsely advertised as being compatible with Keurig® 2.0 and 1.0 models.

 

Bloland v. Zatt (37-2017-00016257-CU-PO-CTL)

  • San Diego County Superior Court

  •  Honorable Kenneth J. Medel

 

Case Summary: Plaintiff alleges that a fire, which originated in Defendant’s unit, caused damage to her unit resulting in damage to her personal property and loss of use of her unit.

 

Cabrera v. CVS Rx Services, Inc. et al. (RG17870184)

  • Alameda County Superior Court

  • Honorable Brad Seligman

 

Case Summary: Plaintiffs, on behalf of similar employees, allege that while working for Defendants CVS Rx Services, Inc., CVS Pharmacy, Inc., and Garfield Beach CVS, LLC, he and other employees were not properly compensated for all the time they spent working, including time they spent participating in CVS mandated training. Plaintiffs also allege that when they were provided with meal and rest breaks they were often interrupted and/or required to work through their breaks.

Doidge v. Kemper Independence Insurance Company (RC1710516)

  • Riverside County Superior Court

  • Honorable John W. Vineyard

 

Case Summary: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Kemper Independence Insurance Company committed bad faith when it failed to adequately and efficiently resolve her insurance claim.

 

Evans v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (2:10-cv-01224-JCM-VCF)

  • United States District Court, District of Nevada

  • Honorable James C. Mahan

 

Case Summary: Plaintiff, on behalf of similar hourly employees, alleges that Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. failed to pay its employees minimum wage and required them work without paying them proper overtime pay.

 

Gonzalez v. L and R Auto Parks, Inc. dba Joe’s Auto Parks (BC589677)

  • Los Angeles County Superior Court

  • Honorable Maren E. Nelson

 

Case Summary: Plaintiff, on behalf of similar parking attendants, alleges that Defendant L and R Auto Parks, Inc. fails to provide parking attendants with adequate meal and rest periods. More specifically, Plaintiff contends that he was required to sign an on-duty meal period agreement that violates California law, because the nature of his work does not prevent him from being relieved of all duty for 30 minutes. In addition, Plaintiff alleges that he was not provided with lawful rest periods because he is not permitted to leave the lot and is required to perform all the same duties that he is required to perform during any other working hours.

​​

Hoffman v. LEGOLAND California, LLC (37-2017-00026357-CU-OE-CTL)

  • San Diego County Superior Court

  • Honorable Eddie C. Sturgeon

 

Case Summary: Plaintiff, on behalf of similar employees, alleges that she and other employees were not properly compensated upon termination of the employment relationship due to Defendant LEGOLAND California, LLC’s alleged practice of withholding final checks until all uniforms are returned.

Hudson v. Pacific Bell Telephone Company dba AT&T (34-2016-00202203)

  • Sacramento County Superior Court

  • Honorable Judge Alan G. Perkins

 

Case Summary: Plaintiff, on behalf of other similar employees, allege that while working for Defendant Pacific Bell Telephone Company dba AT&T, as a technician, he and other employees were not compensated for the time spent loading and unloading their service vehicles, nor were they provided with the opportunity to take a legally compliant meal period.

Kim v. ATV, Inc. dba American Tire Depot, Inc. (BC616213)

  • Los Angeles County Superior Court

  • Honorable William F. Highberger

 

Case Summary: Plaintiff, on behalf of similar employees, alleges that while working as an assistant store manager for Defendant ATV, Inc. dba American Tire Depot, he and other employees were not provided with meal and rest periods because they were often the only employee available to assist customers with transactions. In addition, employees were not provided with a written commission policy that properly informed them of the products and services eligible for commissions.

​​​

Leggins v. Pacific Bell Telephone Company (BC587252)

  • Los Angeles County Superior Court

  • Honorable Judge Ernest M. Hiroshige

 

Case Summary: Plaintiffs, on behalf of similar employees, allege that while working for Defendant Pacific Bell Telephone Company as a splicing technician, they and other employees were periodically required to work seven or more days in violation of California law. Plaintiffs also allege that they were not compensated for all hours worked, and denied meal and rest periods due to the

Medina v. rePlanet, LLC (RG16799801)

  • Alameda County Superior Court

  • Honorable Judge Brad Seligman

Case Summary: Plaintiffs, in a representative capacity, allege that while working as recycling specialists for Defendant rePlanet, LLC, they were not provided with rest breaks and were often provided with late meal periods, which occurred after more than 5 hours of work.

​         

Ogura v. Thrifty Payless, Inc. dba Rite Aid (BC605968)

  • Los Angeles County Superior Court

  • Honorable Judge William F. Highberger

 

Case Summary: Plaintiff, on behalf of similar employees, alleges that he and other assistant store managers employed by Defendant Thrifty Payless, Inc. dba Rite Aid were not provided with lawful rest periods because as the manager on duty, they were required to be always be on-call. As such, Plaintiff alleges that even when rest breaks were provided, they were often interrupted.

​​

Permenter v. Pace Supply Corp. (16CV304183)

  • Santa Clara County Superior Court

  • Honorable Judge Maureen Folan

 

Case Summary: Plaintiff, in his representative capacity, alleges that he and other employees were not paid for all hours worked, were denied meal and rest periods due to the busy nature of the warehouse. Plaintiff also alleges that even when meal or rest breaks were provided they were often interrupted.

 

Ramirez v. Wells Fargo Bank (RG10496146)

  • Alameda County Superior Court

  • Honorable Judge George C. Hernandez, Jr.

 

Case Summary: Plaintiffs, on behalf of similar employees, allege that Defendant Wells Fargo Bank failed to pay its personal bankers and customer service representatives for all hours worked, including overtime compensation.