Andrus Anderson LLP Partners Take Leadership Roles At The American Association for Justice

Lori E. Andrus and Jennie Lee Anderson attended the American Association for Justice Annual Convention in New York City, July 9-12, 2011.   In furtherance of their efforts in and outside of the courtroom to advance the interests of their clients, including injured consumers, employees and small business owners across the United States, Ms. Andrus and Ms. Anderson were both elected to presigious leadership positions this year.  Ms. Andrus was elected First Vice Chair of the Women’s Trial Lawyer Caucus.  Ms. Anderson is the incoming Co-Chair of the organization’s Class Action Litigation Group.  

Andrus Anderson Files Nationwide Gender Discrimination Class Action Against Deere & Co.

On March 16, 2011, Andrus Anderson LLP filed a nationwide sex discrimination class action against Deere & Co. and John Deere Landscapes, Inc. (“Deere”).  Artis v. Deere & Co. (Civ.10-05289 WHA). The suit charges that Deere, a leading farm, agricultural equiptment and landscaping company, systematically denies certain jobs to women and discourages them from even applying.   

The Plaintiff, Holly Artis, applied for a customer service position at Deere’ s landscaping facility.  Despite having over five years of sales and service experience, she was told that Deere “frowned upon hiring women” and was denied the job.  She was falsely told that the position had been cancelled, when in fact it had been given to a man with less experience.  “Deere should not be allowed to continue to deny qualified women employment or discourage them from applying because of their gender,” says co-lead counsel for Plaintiff and the proposed class, Andrus Anderson partner, Jennie Lee Anderson.  “Female applicants must be given the opportunity to compete on a level playing field–that’s the law and it’s also the right thing to do.”   The complete Press Release is available here.  For further information, please Contact Us today, or  visit Deere Class website.

Cal State ESL Teachers Represented by Andrus Anderson LLP

Andrus Anderson represents California State University-East Bay (Cal State) English as a second language (ESL) teachers in a class action in Alameda County Superior Court.  The lawsuit, Nelson et al., v. California State University, East Bay Foundation, Inc., was filed on March 23, 2009 (Case No. RG09442869).

ESL Teachers Allege Violations of Labor Laws, Back Pay Owed

In their complaint, current and former ESL teachers allege that Cal State has not paid them for all hours worked, as required under California’s labor laws.  Specifically, the teachers claim that Cal State’s refusal to pay for all time worked outside of the classroom (including preparation time, grading time and time spent meeting with students), violates California Wage Order 4-2001 and California’s Business & Professions Code § 17200.  Additionally, the lawsuit alleges breach of contract, failure to pay waiting time penalties to former teachers, and failure to maintain accurate time keeping records.

The ESL teachers seek certification of a class of ESL teachers who have not been paid for all hours worked since March 23, 2005, and, among other things, seek back pay with interest, restitution, and civil penalties.

Contact Andrus Anderson

If you are an ESL teacher and have been denied pay for time spent outside of the classroom, we would like to learn more about your experience as part of our investigation.  Please click here to submit your complaint.

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Consumers’ Rights In State Courts

Andrus Anderson LLP lauds a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in Altria v. Good to deny immunity for cigarette manufacturers who violate state consumer protection laws with false claims of lowered tar and nicotine.

Partner Lori Andrus agrees with the statement issued by the America Association for Justice (www.justice.org): “Today’s decision is a victory for consumers and affirms that cigarette manufacturers cannot claim immunity from consumer fraud when they claim their products have lowered tar and nicotine levels, even though they do not. State laws have an important role to play in helping the federal government police false claims, and today’s decision supports that role.”

“We hope that the court continues to look at claims of corporate immunity from the perspective of consumer health and safety and continues to support the rights of consumers to get justice through the courts.”

To view the full Supreme Court opinion, click here.