Fleming
Fleming v. Matco Tools Corporation
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 JOHN FLEMING, Case No. 19-cv-00463-WHO
Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING IN PART
v. MOTION TO CERTIFY CLASS
MATCO TOOLS CORPORATION, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 58 Defendants.
12 INTRODUCTION Plaintiff John Fleming moves for class certification on his wage and hour claims. Dkt. No. 58 (“Mot.”). Matco opposes the motion, arguing that Fleming has failed to meet the typicality and adequacy requirements of Rule 23(a), that common questions do not predominate under Rule 23(b), and that class treatment is not superior. Dkt. No. 67 (“Opp.”). As discussed in detail below, Fleming’s motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Class certification is granted on the threshold question of misclassification; Matco cannot satisfy the “ABC” test under Dynamex Operations W. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal. 5th 903 (2018), which I find applies here, nor show lack of control under S.G. Borello & Sons, Inc. v. Dep’t of Indus. Relations, 48…