Discrimination & Civil Rights Cases
Current Cases
Artis v. Deere & Co. and John Deere Landscapes, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Northern District of California)
A Northern California woman has filed a nationwide class action charging that Deere & Co. and its landscaping division discriminate against women who seek entry level customer service, sales and shipping and receiving positions. The suit charges Deere, a leading farm, agricultural equipment and landscaping company with over 50,000 employees, with systematically denying such jobs to women and discouraging them from even applying. It seeks an order requiring Deere to adopt nondiscriminatory policies, and for lost pay and punitive damages.
Please contact Kirsten Scott for more information or visit the case website.
Vallabhapurapu et al. v. Burger King Corp. and Castaneda et al. v. Burger King Corp. (U.S. District Court, Northern District of California)
These disability class actions against Burger King challenge accessibility barriers at certain California Burger King restaurants for people who use wheelchairs or scooters. The barriers include, for example, excessively heavy doors; queue lines that are too narrow for wheelchairs; inaccessible restrooms, service counters and dining areas; and insufficient accessible parking. The firm is part of a legal team including Fox & Robertson, P.C.
Castaneda was filed September 10, 2008 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. On July 12, 2010, the Court approved a settlement with Burger King as to the ten restaurants that the Court had certified in September 2009. The settlement consisted of $5 million to the class, the largest per-person and per-facility monetary recovery ever in a disability rights class action involving a public accommodation. The settlement claims process has completed and the distribution of the settlement funds is nearly complete. For more information see the Settlement Agreement and Notice at the case website.
On February 14, 2011, Plaintiffs filed a new lawsuit addressing the remaining restaurants throughout California that were originally part of Castaneda but not ultimately part of the settlement. The case is in the initial phases. Please contact Joshua Davidson, Andrew Lah, or Julia Campins for more information.
Click for the Vallabhapurapu Complaint.
Fulcher, et al. v. 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc. (Alameda Superior Court)
Nine current and former employees of 24 Hour Fitness in California have filed an employment discrimination class action lawsuit. The suit charges that 24 Hour Fitness discriminates against minority and female employees by failing to promote them into managerial positions and pay them equally in violation of California law. The trial court has ordered these employees to submit to individual arbitration regarding their claims for damages (money) and, after the completion of this arbitration, will consider the claims on behalf of the class of minority and female employees for injunctive relief to change 24 Hour Fitness's policies and practices. At this time, the Court is not permitting Plaintiffs to assert claims for damages on behalf of any individuals other than themselves.
Please contact Julia Campins for more information or visit the case website.
Darensburg, et al. v. Metropolitan Transportation Commission
The firm is part of a legal team representing a coalition including bus riders, labor, and civil rights advocates in a federal class action lawsuit against the Bay Area’s Metropolitan Transportation Commission on behalf of AC Transit bus riders of color. The suit alleges that MTC violates federal and state civil rights laws by channeling funds in favor of BART and Caltrain commuters while denying equitable funding to AC Transit bus riders of color. In late 2007, the court certified that the case could proceed as a class action. The plaintiffs are two AC Transit bus riders, Communities for a Better Environment (a non-profit organization promoting environmental justice), and Amalgamated Transit Union Local 192, which represents transit employees.
In addition to Lewis Feinberg, the plaintiffs are represented by Public Advocates, Inc.; Communities for a Better Environment; Altshuler Berzon LLP; Cooley Godward Kronish LLP; and Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein LLP.
More information regarding the case, and the inequities in public transportation funding that it is attempting to fix, is available on the web site of Public Advocates.
Ellis v. Costco Wholesale Corp. (U.S District Court, No. District of Cal)
Filed in August 2004, this nationwide glass ceiling class action lawsuit charges Costco with failure to promote women to management positions in their retail warehouses. The proposed class consists of current and former female Costco workers across America who have been subjected to gender discrimination in promotion to warehouse manager and assistant manager positions. Only one in six Costco managers are women, yet its workforce is nearly 50% female. United States District Judge Marilyn Hall Patel granted Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification on January 12th, 2007. Costco appealed that decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. On September 16, 2011, the Ninth Circuit issued an order sending the class certification back to the district court for reconsideration under the Supreme Court's ruling in Wal-Mart v. Dukes.
More information about this case is available at http://genderclassactionagainstcostco.com.