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.