Much has been written of the California Supreme Court’s opinion in Brinker v. Superior Court, (April 12, 2012), ___ Cal.4th ___. The Supreme Court addressed many issues and held in part that despite the employer and Court of Appeal’s position that an employer need only “make available” meal periods, under the law “an employer must relieve the employee of all duty for the designated period,” (id. at 27) and this occurs when the “employee (1) has at least 30 minutes uninterrupted, (2) is free to leave the premises, and (3) is relieved of all duty for the entire period.” Id. at 30 (citations omitted).
What hasn’t received as much attention is the Court’s reiteration of the rule that “[i]n many instances, whether class certification is appropriate or inappropriate may be determined irrespective of which party is correct.” Id. at 10. This is significant because in recent time many defendants contend at the time of class certification that the plaintiff must not only establish that the case may be certified, but must prove the merits of their case. The Brinker Court held, however, that the motion for class certification “is not a license for a free-floating inquiry into the validity of the complaint’s allegations; rather, resolution of disputes over the merits of a case generally must be postponed until after class certification has been decided [citation omitted], with the court assuming for purposes of the certification motion that any claims have merit [citation omitted].” Id. at 11.
While the Brinker Court recognized the U.S. Supreme Court’s holding in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, (2011) 564 U.S. __, __, that the merits may be enmeshed with class action requirements, the court found that “[s]uch inquiries are closely circumscribed.” Brinker at 12. Due to the one-way intervention rule, which generally precludes a plaintiff in a class action from moving for summary adjudication prior to certification, “courts generally should eschew resolution of such issues unless necessary.” Id. at 13.
So the Brinker opinion can be seen as not only a win for consumers from a wage and hour law perspective, but also from a class action procedural perspective.
Posted in Blog | No Comments »