Holding employers and corporations accountable for unlawful actions.
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.
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.
Team Members
Adam Berger
Lindsay Halm
Elizabeth Hanley
Carson Phillips-Spotts
Rebecca Roe
Joe Solseng
Andy Boes
Chen-Chen Jiang
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.
Class Action Cases
Case Results
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.
Tecton & I.Q. Data
In April 2024, together with our co-counsel Anderson Santiago PLLC, 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.
On December 30, 2025 the court determined that this lawsuit should proceed as a class action. Follow the links below to view important documents in the case.
If you vacated your unit prior to expiration of your lease agreement with Tecton and if Tecton retained your security deposit and/or collected a cancellation fee or future rent/utilities from you at any time since April 22, 2020, contact paralegal, Mary Dardeau at (206) 233-1257 or (800) 809-2234 or dardeau@sgb-law.com.
To learn more about the attorneys working on this case, click here.
Order Denying Motion for Summary
GREP Washington, LLC d.b.a. Greystar
In April 2025, SGB along with Anderson Santiago, PLLC filed a class action lawsuit in King County Superior Court on behalf of all tenants who moved out prior to the end of their lease term and who were charged and/or paid money toward, or had some or all of their security deposits applied to a “buy-out” fee, “reletting charge,” and/or future rent. Greystar removed the lawsuit from King County Superior Court to the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington in Seattle, and the District Court subsequently remanded the lawsuit back to King County Superior Court, where it is currently pending with a trial date scheduled in February 2027.
For further information about this case, or to tell us about your experience as a current or former tenant of Greystar, contact paralegal, Mary Dardeau at (206) 233-1257 or (800) 809-2234 or dardeau@sgb-law.com.
Ideal Services
In October 2024, SGB filed a class action lawsuit in King County Superior Court against Ideal Services and its owners over claims of unpaid drive time and inadequate breaks. On April 17, 2026 the court granted final approval of a class-wide settlement with Ideal Services. The first distribution of settlement funds was in May 2026 with a check cashing deadline of August 20, 2026. A second distribution is scheduled for May 24, 2027 with a second check cashing deadline of August 22, 2027.
If you are an hourly-paid current or former employee of Ideal Services NW and worked in Washington state at any time from October 2, 2021 to October 11, 2024 and were assigned a company vehicle as a construction lead, master electrician, certified plumber, technician, or in a similar job classification, you may be entitled to an award under the settlement. For further information, contact paralegal, Mary Dardeau at (206) 233-1257 or (800) 809-2234 or dardeau@sgb-law.com.
To learn more about the attorneys working on this case, click here.
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. On June 3, 2026 the court granted preliminary approval of a class-wide settlement with Integrity Traffic with a final approval hearing scheduled for September 18, 2026.
If you are a current or former hourly-paid employee who worked for Integrity Traffic at any time between September 16, 2021 and March 1, 2025 as a flagger, lead flagger, traffic control supervisor, or similar job classification, you may be entitled to an award under the settlement. For further information, contact paralegal, Mary Dardeau at (206) 233-1257 or (800) 809-2234 or dardeau@sgb-law.com.
To learn more about the attorneys working on this case, click here.
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. Playstudios then filed a renewed Motion to Compel Arbitration in July 2025 which the district court denied on February 3, 2026. Playstudios has appealed this decision to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the district court has issued a stay of proceedings pending this appeal. 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.
To learn more about the attorneys working on this case, click here.
Order Denying MTD and Compel Arbitration
Order Denying Renewed Mot. to Compel Arbitration
Tagle & Partners LLC (Beehive Espresso)
In July 2024, SGB and co-counsel at Fair Work Center filed a class action lawsuit in King County Superior Court 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. A bench trial was held earlier this spring and the parties are awaiting the judge’s verdict. Follow the links below to view important documents in the case.
If you 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.
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 Terminals and SSA Conventional, 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.
On June 24, 2026, the Court certified the case as a class action on behalf of all hourly-paid employees who are covered by a Collective Bargaining Agreement between ILWU and PMA and have worked on a PMA Member jobsite located in the State of Washington at any time since May 29, 202. The Court also certified a defendant class of employers, represented by Defendant PMA and the SSA Defendants. 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.
To learn more about the attorneys working on this case, click here.
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.
On February 6, 2026 the court determined that this lawsuit should proceed as a class action, with trial set to commence in February 2027. 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.
To learn more about the attorneys working on this case, click here.
Order Denying Motion for Judgement
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.
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. GEO petitioned the Ninth Circuit for a rehearing which was denied on August 13, 2025.. GEO is now seeking Supreme Court review of the judgment. The Supreme Court will decide whether or not to accept review in the first half of 2026. If the Supreme Court accepts review, the appeal could take from months to over a year to finally resolve.
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
Frequently Asked Questions
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.
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 case review.