Koval

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiffs Frank Koval, Mike Williams, Vanmark Strickland, and Donald Washington filed this consolidated class action lawsuit against their employer, defendant Pacific Bell Telephone Company (doing business as AT&T California) (Pacific Bell). They alleged Pacific Bell violated California law by failing to relinquish control over their activities during meal and rest break periods, and they moved for class certification. Relying, in part, on Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court (2012) 53 Cal.4th 1004 [ 139 Cal.Rptr.3d 315 , 273 P.3d 513 ] (Brinker), the trial court concluded plaintiffs failed to show Pacific Bell’s allegedly restrictive policies had been consistently applied to the putative class members. The court denied class certification on the ground that common questions do not predominate over individual questions, making the class action procedure an inappropriate method for resolving this dispute. We affirm.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

I. Background

Pacific Bell is a telecommunications company providing wire line local telephone service, as well as digital television and Internet service, to residential, business, and…