Bowerman

Bowerman v. Field Asset Services, Inc.

Good Law
242 F. Supp. 3d 910·2017 WL 1036645·2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39000
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 17, 2017Case No. 3:13-cv-00057-WHOCalifornia19,649 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Orrick, J.

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DECERTIFY THE CLASS; GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT; GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO MAGDALENO AND DENYING AS TO COHICK AND ACKEL

Re: Dkt. Nos. 152, 154, 155

INTRODUCTION

This is a classwide misclassification ease involving vendors who perform property preservation services in California for Field Asset Services, Inc. I previously granted plaintiffs’ renewed motion for class certification after they “limitfed] the class to a group of vendors over which FAS has a uniform right of control.” Certification Order at 2 (Dkt. No. 85). FAS now moves to decertify the class, and for summary judgment as to one of the named plaintiffs and two absent class members. Plaintiffs move for partial summary judgment as to their status as employees under the law, and their resulting entitlement to expenses and overtime pay.

While FAS again highlights manageability concerns that complicate class treatment, as it has throughout this litigation, those concerns are not substantial enough to justify decertifying the class. The class meets the requirements of Rule 23 and discovery has not revealed otherwise. The…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.