Schroeter Goldmark Bender - Seattle Law Firm & Trial Lawyers Alternate Logo for - Schroeter Goldmark Bender - Seattle Law Firm & Trial Lawyers
Español
Contact Us

800-809-2234

206-622-8000

We hold employers and corporations accountable.

Corporations often place profits over their responsibilities to their workers and consumers. And when their actions cause harm, the individuals who suffer often feel helpless when it comes to seeking restitution. That’s where SGB comes in. If you are a worker or consumer who has been cheated by a corporation, we’re here to fight for your rights with a class action lawsuit. A “class action” is a case brought by an individual or small group on behalf of a large number of people who have been harmed by the same wrongful conduct. We’re relentless in pursuing real results for real people.

What sets our class action attorneys apart?

SGB is one of the Northwest’s premier class action law firms. SGB class action attorneys have a long history of helping people like you take on even the largest defendants, including Fortune 500 companies. And unlike many firms, we have extensive experience taking class actions to trial, which enables us to negotiate better settlements when possible, or pursue the case to judgement when not. We pursue cutting-edge issues—including the wage-and-hour and consumer-protection fields—and our class actions have led to myriad precedent-setting decisions that have expanded worker and consumer rights, all the way up to the Washington State and U.S. Supreme Courts.

SGB attorneys have litigated many cutting-edge cases that have resulted in new law, benefiting our clients in particular and many workers and consumers in Washington in general. We take great pride in our innovative approach to the practice of law and our firm's focus on protecting and promoting employee and consumer rights.

Start with a free, confidential case review

If you or someone you love has suffered from consumer fraud or abuses in the workplace, SGB is here to help. There is no charge for us to evaluate your potential claim. If we take the case, we do so on a contingency basis. We only recover our fees and costs if we are successful in obtaining relief for the class through judgement or settlement. Contact us for a free, confidential case review or call us at (800) 809-2234 or (206) 622-8000.

Bulwark Construction

In August of 2018, SGB filed a class action lawsuit against Bulwark Construction, Inc. alleging that it failed to provide and tell Plaintiffs of their right to sick and safe time or what it could be used for, and failed to provide employees with notice of their rights under PSST Ordinance.

No class has yet been certified. A trial date in this matter is set for September 16, 2019 in King County Superior Court.

If you have any questions about this case or are a current or former employee and would like to speak to us about your employment with Bulwark, please call our assistant, Victoria Molina, at (206) 233-1254 or (1-800) 809-2234.

Complaint

Confluence Health

In May 2018, along with Corey Kane of Lacy Kane in Wenatchee, SGB filed a class action lawsuit in Chelan County Superior Court on behalf of hourly workers for Confluence Health alleging that Confluence Health’s time clock rounding policy, as implemented, violated the Washington Minimum Wage Act. The lawsuit seeks compensation for individuals for time worked but not paid under the time clock rounding policy. The lawsuit also alleges that Confluence Health violated the Minimum Wage Act by docking employees extra time for clocking back late from lunch.

No class has yet been certified, and a trial date has not yet been set. 

If you have any questions about this case or are a current or former employee and would like to speak to us about your employment with Confluence Health, please call our assistant, Victoria Molina, at (206) 233-1254 or (1-800) 809-2234.

Complaint

Damco Distribution Services, Inc. / Damco USA Inc.

In December 2017, SGB filed a class action lawsuit against Damco alleging that it misclassified Operations Supervisors at its Sumner, Washington warehouse as exempt from overtime compensation under the Washington Minimum Wage Act. Plaintiff alleges that the Operations Supervisors did not customarily or regularly direct the work of two or more employees or otherwise satisfy criteria for the overtime exemption.

The class was certified on October 22, 2018. The new trial date is June 24, 2019 in Pierce County Superior Court. Plaintiff is represented by SGB along with Jim Pizl of Entente Law Group in Puyallup, Washington. 

If you have any questions about this case or are a current or former employee and would like to speak to us about your employment with Damco, please call our assistant, Victoria Molina, at (206) 233-1254 or (1-800) 809-2234.

Complaint

DirecTV LLC/AT&T, Inc.

In April 2017, SGB filed a class action lawsuit against DirecTV LLC (now known as AT&T, Inc.) for failing to pay its service/installation technicians for all hours worked, including time spent driving to job sites, attending meetings, and restocking vehicles.

On May 21, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court in a case called Epic Systems v. Lewis, upheld the enforceability of arbitration agreements requiring workers to pursue their wage claims through individual arbitration. SGB believes all or most DirecTV technicians, including the named plaintiff in this case, has signed such agreements. Therefore, DirecTV technicians who wish to pursue wage claims for unpaid drive time and other uncompensated work time must do so through individual arbitration claims.

If you would like SGB to pursue those claims on your behalf, please contact our paralegal, Sheila Cronan, at (206) 233-1221 or (800) 809-2234.

Complaint

Epic Systems v. Lewis U.S. Supreme Court Decision

Eastside For Hire, Inc.

In September 2017, SGB filed a class action lawsuit against Eastside for Hire, Inc. and its Owners for their failure to uphold the terms of contracts with taxi and for-hire service Drivers. The lawsuit alleges that the Company and its Owners collected per-trip fees from Drivers beyond what they owe, charged Drivers for services the Company did not provide, and have otherwise failed to deal in good faith with the Drivers.

Trial is scheduled to start on November 18, 2019 in King County Superior Court. The Court has not yet certified a class.

Classic Action Complaint

Entered Order Granting Class Certification

If you have any questions about this case, please contact our paralegal, Sheila Cronan, at (206) 233-1221 or (800) 809-2234.

Extra Car Airport Parking, Inc. 

SGB has filed a class action lawsuit in King County Superior Court in Kent, Washington, alleging that Extra Car Airport Parking failed to pay its employees the new minimum wage rate of $15 per hour established under the SeaTac Municipal Code. The lawsuit also alleges that Extra Car failed, in some instances, to pay proper overtime wages. 

This case has settled and the Court entered final approval on June 7, 2018. Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement the first installment of payments under the settlement to direct employee of Extra Car (i.e., members of the Lehman class) were mailed on July 27th, with a second installment in February 2019. Settlement payments to employees of Command Center who worked at Extra Car (i.e., members of the Russell class) will be mailed in February 2020. 

Class members are encouraged to contact paralegal Sheila Cronan at 206-233-1221 with questions. To see the Complaint click on the “Documents” tab below.

Lehman Complaint

Settlement Agreement

Order Granting Final Approval of Settlement

Garda CL Northwest, Inc.

Along with co-counsel Dan Johnson, SGB prosecuted a class action lawsuit in King County Superior Court alleging that Garda failed to provide its armored car drivers and guards with rest and meal breaks. Following a bench trial in the summer of 2015, Judge Julie Spector entered judgment in the amount of $8.4 million on behalf of the plaintiff class. Garda has appealed that judgment.

The Court of Appeals upheld the judgment, but partially revoked the award of double damages following the Pellino v. Brink’s decision of 2010. On August 23, 2018 the Washington State Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded for further consideration of the double damages award. The case is currently pending before the Court of Appeals.

If you should have any questions about this case, please contact our paralegal, Sheila Cronan at (206) 233-1221 or (800) 809-2234.

Complaint & Summons

Entered Judgement

Court of Appeals Decision March 27, 2017

Intalco Aluminum , Inc. A Subsidiary of Alcoa Corporation

In August 2017, SGB filed a class action lawsuit against Intalco for the Company’s failure to pay certain employees for the time spent donning safety equipment at the start of each shift. The proposed class includes employees working on the Potlines and in the Cast House at the Ferndale Plant in any of the following positions: Potline operator, Potline floater, Cast House furnace operator, Cast House saw operator, Cast House caster, Cast House driver, or Cast House blue room operator. 

The Court granted final approval of the class action settlement on August 30, 2019. It is anticipated that settlement checks will be mailed in early November 2019.

Class Action Complaint 

If you have any questions about this case, please contact our paralegal, Sheila Cronan, at (206) 233-1221 or (800) 809-2234.

Matia Contractors, Inc. / Matia Jansen JV

In December 2018, along with Jim Pizl of Entente Law Group in Puyallup, we filed a class action lawsuit in King County Superior Court on behalf of equipment operators, general laborers and those in similar positions who were not paid for time spent traveling between Matia’s headquarters and customer job sites at the beginning and end of each work day. 

If you work or have worked for Matia Contractors/Matia Jansen JV, please contact our paralegal, Sheila Cronan, at (206) 233-1221, or (1-800) 809-2234.

Munger Brothers LLC; Sarbanand Farms LLC.

In January 2018, along with Columbia Legal Services in Wenatchee, SGB filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington on behalf of over 600 H-2A farm workers who worked at Sarbanand Farms in 2017. Plaintiffs allege that Sarbanand and its related companies violated federal anti-trafficking laws through a pattern of threats and intimidation causing its H-2A workforce to believe they would suffer harm unless they submitted to the companies’ labor demands; created a hostile work environment based on the farm workers’ national origin; violated state contract and consumer protection laws by imposing stringent hourly production standards neither approved nor listed in the H-2A job order; and failed to provide sufficient or nutritionally adequate meals for which the workers paid, to perform grueling harvest labor. Plaintiffs also allege that Sarbanand violated the Washington Farm Labor Contractors Act by knowingly using farm labor contractors who had not obtained the required licensing under state law. 

No class has yet been certified, and a trial date has not yet been set. 

If you have any questions about this case or are a current or former H-2A worker or other employee and would like to speak to us about your employment with Munger Brothers or Sarbanand Farms, please call our assistant, Victoria Molina, at (206) 233-1254 or (1-800) 809-2234.    

Munger Brothers LLC; Sarbanand Farms LLC

En Enero de 2018, junto con Columbia Legal Services en Wenatchee, SGB presentó una demanda colectiva en el Tribunal de Distrito de los Estados Unidos para el Distrito Oeste de Washington en nombre de más de 600 trabajadores agrícolas H-2A que trabajaron en Sarbanand Farms en 2017. Los demandantes alegan que Sarbanand y sus compañías relacionadas violaron las leyes federales anti-tráfico a través de un patrón de amenazas e intimidación que hizo que su fuerza de trabajo H-2A creyera que sufrirían daños a menos que se sometieran a las demandas laborales de la compañía; creó un ambiente de trabajo hostil basado en el origen nacional de los trabajadores agrícolas; violó las leyes de contratos estatales y protección al consumidor al imponer normas estrictas de producción por hora sin ser aprobadas ni enumeradas en la orden de trabajo H-2A; y fallo en proporcionar comidas suficientes o nutricionales por las cuales los trabajadores pagaron, para realizar una agotador labor de cosecha. Los demandantes también alegan que Sarbanand violó la Ley de Contratistas de Trabajadores Agrícolas de Washington al saber que estaban utilizando contratistas de mano de obra agrícola que no habían obtenido la licencia exigida por la ley estatal. 

Aún no se ha certificado ninguna clase, y aún no se ha establecido una fecha de juicio. 

Si tiene alguna pregunta sobre este caso o es un trabajador H-2A actual o anterior u otro empleado y quisiera hablar con nosotros sobre su empleo en Munger Brothers o Sarbanand Farms, comuníquese con nuestra asistente, Victoria Molina, al (206) ) 233-1254 o (1-800) 809-2234.

Ranier Dodge, Inc.

In April 2017, SGB, together with the Law Offices of Jonathan Rudnick, filed a class action lawsuit against Rainier Dodge, Inc., alleging violation of written pay plans it entered into with its salespeople. The lawsuit alleges that Rainier Dodge inflated certain “costs” on new and used vehicles in order to reduce the employees’ overall commissions.

The Court granted final approval of the class action settlement on June 21, 2019, and settlement checks were mailed to the class on August 7, 2019.

If you have not yet received your settlement check or have any questions about this case, please contact our paralegal, Sheila Cronan at (206) 233-1221 or (800) 809-2234.

Class Action Complaint

THR Washington II, LP and THR Property Management, LP dba Invitation Homes

In April 2018, along with Jim Pizl of Entente Law Group in Puyallup, SGB filed a class action lawsuit in King County Superior Court on behalf of technicians who worked for Invitation Homes inspecting and maintaining its rental properties in Washington State. These technicians were not paid their drive time for transporting old appliances, construction debris and other garbage from the rental homes to their personal residences at the end of the work day. The lawsuit also alleges that technicians were unable to take lunch breaks, and were not compensated for those missed meal periods.

The Court entered an order granting final approval of the settlement on April 19, 2019, and settlement checks were mailed to the class on June 11, 2019. If you did not receive a settlement check and worked for THR Washington II or THR Property Management between April 2015 and the present, please contact our paralegal, Sheila Cronan, at (206) 233-1221 or (1-800) 809-2234.

Complaint

Settlement Agreement

Order - Preliminary Approval

If you have any questions about this case please call our paralegal, Sheila Cronan, at (206) 233-1221 or (1-800) 809-2234.

Total Renal Care, Inc.

In April 2019, along with Jim Pizl of Entente Law Group in Puyallup, we filed a class action lawsuit in King County Superior Court on behalf of dialysis nurses or those in similar positions with similar duties who worked for Total Renal Care and did not receive their statutory meal periods.

If you work or have worked for Total Renal Care and would like to discuss this case, please contact our paralegal, Sheila Cronan, at (206) 233-1221, or (1-800) 809-2234.

FAQs

A class action is a lawsuit brought on behalf of one or a few individuals on behalf of a much larger group of people who have all been injured in the same way by the same conduct of a corporation, government agency, or other defendant.
In order for a case to go ahead as a class action, the person filing the lawsuit must ask the court’s permission for the case to be “certified” as a class. Usually this happens after an initial round of discovery, or exchange of information, between the parties to the lawsuit. Sometimes the court will make its decision based on written arguments by the parties, while other times it will hold an evidentiary hearing.
Usually, after the court certifies a case as a class action, it will order notice to all class members informing them of the claims in the case and its certification as a class action. Class members will then have an opportunity to “opt out” of the class action, in which case they will neither benefit from any recovery in the case nor be bound by any judgment in the action. Class members who do not opt out will be bound by any further decisions in the case, whether favorable or unfavorable to the class. Class members are generally not obligated to do anything in order to remain in and benefit from the class action. They usually do not have to respond to any discovery, nor are they financially obligated in any way. Of course, some class members may choose to take a more active role and provide support to the class action by supplying information to the attorneys for the class or even testifying during discovery or at trial. However, this active participation is usually strictly voluntary.
If a class action goes all the way through trial, a jury or judge will decide the case and award damages, if favorable, to the entire class. However, like most civil lawsuits, most class actions settle before trial. In that case, the parties will propose a settlement to the court, and all class members will receive notice of the proposed settlement and an opportunity to comment. Any class action settlement must be approved by the court, and the court will only approve a settlement if it is reasonable, fair and adequate.
The lawyers in a class action only get paid if they are successful in obtaining a recovery for the class. Then, they may be awarded a percentage of the money recovered for the class. Alternatively, in many consumer and employment cases, the court may order the defendant to pay the attorneys’ fees and costs. In either event, the attorneys’ fees are subject to oversight and approval by the court. Similarly, the costs of litigating a class action are advanced by the lawyers, who are only reimbursed if the case is successful. Again, the court must approve any reimbursement of the costs incurred by the lawyers.

Team Members

Adam Berger

Adam Berger
Attorney
Lindsay Halm

Lindsay Halm
Attorney
Rebecca Roe

Rebecca Roe

Attorney
Jamal Whitehead

Jamal Whitehead
Attorney
“Great attention to detail, compassion and dedication”

“I just received the notice of settlement letter in our favor in the Pellino v. Brink's Incorporated class action lawsuit and I would like to express my deep appreciation for Adam Berger. His attention to detail, compassion and dedication to providing the best possible representation for the plaintiffs in this case was outstanding and deserves to be recognized. I would not hesitate to recommend his services to anyone. Many thanks and many blessings!”

Michael, Class Action Client - Seattle, WA