Seattle Class Action Lawsuit Attorneys

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 who has been the victim of wage theft or a consumer who has been cheated by a corporation, we’re here to fight for your rights with a class action lawsuit. Attorneys from our firm will explain your rights as a plaintiff in a “class action” case. These are cases brought by an individual or small group on behalf of a larger group of people who have been harmed by the same bad conduct. Our class action lawyers are relentless in pursuing real results for real people. SBG is known among Seattle class action law firms for getting results that benefit real people. When we file a class action lawsuit, attorneys in our firm work diligently on behalf of the entire group that has been harmed.

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 judgment when not. We pursue cutting-edge issues in class action suits—including in wage theft and consumer-protection cases—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 class action lawyers have litigated many cutting-edge cases that have resulted in new law, benefiting our clients and workers and consumers in Washington more broadly. 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, wage theft, 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.

Two Men and a Moving Van, et al.

In April 2024, SGB filed a class action lawsuit against moving companies Two Men and a Moving Van, Lion Movers, and Move For Less, alleging wage theft (including travel time and pre- and post-shift work) and inadequate meal and rest breaks. The Court has found all three defendants to be in default. This case is currently pending in the King County Superior Court. Follow the links to read more about this case.

Complaint

Tecton & I.Q. Data

In April 2024, together with our co-counsel Anderson Santiago, SGB filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of current and former tenants and consumers against Tecton Corporation and its collection agency I.Q. Data, alleging violations of consumer laws, including the Residential Landlord Tenant Act. Disputed charges include hold fees, lease cancellation fees, and security deposits. Tecton Corporation attempted to have the case dismissed without a trial, but the court denied the company’s request. The suit is currently pending in King County Superior Court, and trial is set for November 3, 2025.

For further information about this case, or to tell us about your experience as a tenant of Tecton Corporation, contact paralegal, Mary Dardeau at (206) 233-1257 or (800) 809-2234 or dardeau@sgb-law.com.

Complaint

Order Denying Motion for Summary

Ideal Services

In October 2024, SGB filed a class action lawsuit against Ideal Services and its owners over claims of unpaid drive time and inadequate breaks. The litigation aims to cover all current and former hourly employees at Ideal Services who drive company vans to client sites around Washington. Trial is set for October 2025.

For further information about this case, or to tell us about your experience as a current or former employee at Ideal Services, contact paralegal, Mary Dardeau at (206) 233-1257 or (800) 809-2234 or dardeau@sgb-law.com.

Complaint

Integrity Traffic

In September 2024, SGB filed a class action lawsuit against Integrity Traffic for claims of unpaid drive time, inadequate breaks, and prevailing wage violations. The litigation aims to cover all current and former hourly employees at Integrity Traffic who worked as Flaggers, Lead Flaggers, Traffic Control Supervisors, or similar jobs in Washington. Trial is set for October 2025.

For further information about this case, or to tell us about your experience as a current or former employee at Integrity Traffic, contact paralegal, Mary Dardeau at (206) 233-1257 or (800) 809-2234 or dardeau@sgb-law.com.\

Complaint

Playstudios

In April 2024, SGB filed a class action lawsuit against Playstudios, Inc., a global gaming studio that hosts a collection of online casino games. The suit alleges that Playstudios violated Washington’s Recovery of Money Lost at Gambling law as well as the state’ s Consumer Protection Act, resulting in unjust enrichment for the company. The lawsuit was removed from King County Superior Court and is currently pending in the United Stated District Court for the Western District of Washington in Seattle.

On October 18, 2024, the district court denied Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and Compel Arbitration, in which Playstudios sought to dismiss the case and move the legal action into arbitration. Follow the links to view important documents in the case.

For further information about this case, or to tell us about your experience playing Playstudios’ games, contact paralegal, Mary Dardeau at (206) 233-1257 or (800) 809-2234 or dardeau@sgb-law.com.

Complaint

Order Denying MTD and Compel Arbitration

Tagle & Partners LLC (Beehive Espresso)

In July 2024, SGB and co-counsel at Fair Work Center filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of all current and former baristas employed by Tagle & Partners LLC and Alan Tagle alleging wage theft and violations of paid sick leave laws. On May 15, 2025, we amended our complaint to include allegations related to Defendants’ restrictions on baristas ability to hold a second job.

On June 10, 2025 the Court determined that this lawsuit should proceed as a class action, with trial likely to occur later this year. Follow the links below to view important documents in the case.

If you worked as a barista at any of Defendants’ coffee stands between July 15, 2021 and June 10, 2025 and have any questions or would like additional information, please contact paralegal, Mary Dardeau at (206) 233-1257 or (800) 809-2234 or dardeau@sgb-law.com.

Complaint

Order Granting Class Action

Amazon (Delivery Fees)

On September 15, 2023, SGB, with co-counsel Cohen & Malad, LLP, filed a class action lawsuit alleging that Amazon violated the Washington Consumer Protection Act (CPA) and breached its contracts with consumers by collecting additional fees for delivery within specified delivery windows and then failing to refund those fees when delivery occurred outside the selected window.

On June 10, 2024, the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington dismissed Plaintiff’s claims, with leave to amend the CPA claims. After Plaintiff filed an amended complaint, Amazon moved again to dismiss the CPA claims. That motion is currently pending before the district court. Follow the links to view important documents in the case.

For further information about this case, or to tell us about your experience, contact paralegal, Mary Dardeau at (206) 233-1257 or (800) 809-2234 or dardeau@sgb-law.com.

First Amended Complaint

Second Amended Complaint

June Order

Pacific Maritime Association and SSA Marine

In May 2024, SGB filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of current and formerly employed longshore workers against Pacific Maritime Association and SSA Marine, alleging violations of paid sick leave laws. The lawsuit was removed from King County Superior Court and is currently pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington in Seattle. A trial date has not yet been set. Follow the links below to view important documents in the case.

For further information about this case, or to tell us about your experience, contact paralegal, Mary Dardeau at (206) 233-1257 or (800) 809-2234 or dardeau@sgb-law.com.

Complaint

Yakima HMA

In October 2020, SGB filed a class action lawsuit in Yakima County Superior Court against Yakima HMA, LLC on behalf of hospice and home health care nurses for claims of inadequate breaks and wage theft during the period April 12, 2012 through August 31, 2017. The company immediately sought to have the case dismissed on statute of limitations grounds, but the Washington Supreme Court disagreed and sent the case back to the trial court. The case is set for trial on April 26, 2016. Follow the links below to view important documents in the case.

For further information about this case, or to tell us about your work experience with Yakima HMA, contact paralegal, Mary Dardeau at (206) 233-1257 or (800) 809-2234 or dardeau@sgb-law.com.

Complaint

Order Denying Motion for Judgement

Supreme Court Opinion

Amazon (Grocery Delivery Fees)

In June 2022, SGB’s co-counsel, Borde Law and Law Offices of Ronald A. Marron, filed a class action lawsuit alleging that Amazon falsely advertised and promised that Amazon Prime subscribers would receive “Free 2-Hour Grocery Delivery” from Whole Foods Market, while actually charging its members a service fee for deliveries.

The United States District Court for the Western District of Washington in Seattle dismissed all claims in the lawsuit by orders dated December 7, 2023 and July 19, 2024. SGB has appealed those orders to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Follow the links to view important documents in the case.

For further information about this case, or to tell us about your experience, contact paralegal, Mary Dardeau at (206) 233-1257 or (800) 809-2234 or dardeau@sgb-law.com.

Complaint

July 2024 Order

December 2023 Order

Triple Canopy

SGB filed suit against Triple Canopy, Inc. and Valensec International, Inc. in August 2022, alleging that Defendants failed to provide security guards in Washington state with legally required meal breaks or additional compensation for missed meal breaks. On September 10, 2024, the court granted final approval of a class-wide settlement with Triple Canopy. Settlement funds have been distributed with a cash-checking deadline of March 5, 2025. Follow the links to view important documents in the case.

If you work or have worked for Triple Canopy as a protective security officer in Washington state and would like to discuss this case, please contact our paralegal, Mary Dardeau at (206) 233-1257 or (800) 809-2234 or dardeau@sgb-law.com.

Complaint

Final Approval Order

Class Notice

Virginia Mason Medical Center

In March 2020, SGB filed a class action lawsuit in King County Superior Court against Virginia Mason Medical Center on behalf of all hourly-paid employees of Virginia Mason who recorded missed meal or rest breaks in Virginia Mason’s electronic timekeeping system.

The trial court certified the case as a class action on June 4, 2021. On May 9, 2022, the trial court granted summary judgment on all claims in favor of the employee class, and on June 1, 2023, the court entered a $3.3M stipulated judgment in favor of the class. The Washington Court of Appeal affirmed that judgment on September 30, 2024. Virginia Mason is seeking review of that decision by the Washington Supreme Court. Follow the links to view important documents in the case.

If you are a current or former hourly paid employee of Virginia Mason Medical Center who reported missed rest or meal breaks in Defendant’s electronic timekeeping system (Kronos) between March 24, 2017 and January 25, 2020, and would like to discuss this case, please contact our paralegal, Mary Dardeau at (206) 233-1257 or (800) 809-2234 or dardeau@sgb-law.com.

Complaint

Trial Court Order Granting SJ

Court of Appeals Opinion

GEO Group, Inc. en Español

Junto con los abogados Andrew Free, Devin Theriot-Orr y Meena Mentor, SGB presentó una demanda contra GEO Group, Inc. En septiembre de 2017, alegando que el grupo GEO violó la Ley de Salario Mínimo de Washington al no pagar el salario mínimo (por hora) a los detenidos civiles por inmigración que trabajaron para GEO en su programa de trabajo voluntario en el Centro de Detención del Noroeste en Tacoma, Washington.

El 29 de octubre de 2021, un jurado federal emitió un veredicto de $17.3 millones a favor del grupo de detenidos que trabajaron en el Programa de Trabajo Voluntario en el Centro de Procesamiento de Hielo del Noroeste (antes conocido como Centro de Detención del Noroeste) en Tacoma, Washington, en cualquier fecha entre el 26 de septiembre de 2014 y el 29 de octubre de 2021. El grupo GEO apeló el veredicto del jurado y el Noveno Circuito afirmó la sentencia a favor del grupo demandante el 16 de enero de 2025. Si GEO solicita la reconsideración de la opinión del Noveno Circuito o la revisión por parte de la Corte Suprema, como se espera, esto podría tardar meses hasta más de un año en resolverse, dependiendo de si esos tribunales conceden una revisión adicional.

Si usted cree que es miembro de la clase, favor de comunicarse con la asistente legal, Mary Dardeau, al número telefónico (206) 233-1257 ó al (800) 809-2234 ó a el correo electrónico dardeau@sgb-law.com para asegurarse de que tengamos su información de contacto actualizada.

Class Notice (Spanish)

Ninth Circuit Opinion

GEO Group, Inc.

Along with attorneys Andrew Free, Devin Theriot-Orr, and Meena Mentor, SGB filed suit against the GEO Group, Inc. in September 2017, alleging that GEO violated the Washington Minimum Wage Act by not paying minimum hourly wages to civil immigration detainees who worked for GEO in its voluntary work program at the Northwest Detention Center in Tacoma, Washington.

On October 29, 2021, a federal jury returned a verdict of $17.3 million in favor of the class of detainees who worked in the Voluntary Work Program at the Northwest ICE Process Center (formerly known as the Northwest Detention Center) in Tacoma, Washington, any time between September 26, 2014, and October 29, 2021. GEO appealed the jury’s verdict and the Ninth Circuit affirmed the judgment in favor of the plaintiff class of detained individuals on January 16, 2025. If GEO petitions for reconsideration of the Ninth Circuit's opinion or review by the Supreme Court, as expected, this could take from months to over a year to resolve, depending on whether those courts grant further review.

If you believe you are a member of the class, please contact paralegal, Mary Dardeau at (206) 233-1257 or (800) 809-2234 or dardeau@sgb-law.com to ensure we have current contact information for you.

Amended Class Action Complaint

Order Granting Class Certification

Class Notice (English)

Class Notice (Spanish)

Ninth Circuit Opinion

FAQs

What is a class action?

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.

How does a single claim become a class action?

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.

What happens after the court certifies a case as a class action?

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.

How do class actions get resolved?

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.

Who pays the lawyers?

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

Attorney

Lindsay Halm

Attorney

Elizabeth Hanley

Attorney

Carson Phillips-Spotts

Attorney

Rebecca Roe

Attorney

Joe Solseng

Attorney

Andy Boes

Attorney

Chen-Chen Jiang

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