Augustus v. ABM Security Services, Inc. (CA Court of Appeals).

62 Pages·2014·1.93 MB·English

B243788
SERVICE ON ATTORNEY GENERAL AND DISTRICT
ATTORNEY REQUIRED BY BUS. & PROF. CODE,
§17209 AND CAL. RULES OF COURT, RULE 8.212(C).
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE
JENNIFER AUGUSTUS et al.,
Plaintiffs and Respondents,
v.
ABM SECURITY SERVICES, INC., formerly d.b.a.
AMERICAN COMMERCIAL SECURITY SERVICES, INC.,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL FROM LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
JOHN WILEY, JR., JUDGE • CASE NOS. BC336416, BC345918 AND CG5444421
APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMICI CURIAE BRIEF AND
AMICI CURIAE BRIEF OF CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITY
COMPANIES, AND CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF LICENSED
SECURITY AGENCIES IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT AND
APPELLANT ABM SECURITY SERVICES, INC.; [PROPOSED ORDER]
HORVITZ & LEVY LLP
JOHN A. TAYLOR, JR. (BAR No. 129333)
*ROBERT H. WRIGHT (BAR No. 155489)
FELIX SHAFIR (BAR No. 207372)
15760 VENTURA BOULEVARD, 18TH FLOOR
ENCINO, CALIFORNIA 91436-3000
[phone] • FAX: [phone]
[email protected]
fshafir@horvitzlevy .com
rwright@horvitzlevy .com
ATTORNEYS FOR AMICI CURIAE
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITY COMPANIES, AND CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF LICENSED SECURITY AGENCIES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ........................................................... iii
APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMICI CURIAE
BRIEF ................................................................................................ 1
AMICI CURIAE BRIEF ................................................................... 8
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................. 8
LEGAL ARGUMENT .................................................................... 12
I. CLASS CERTIFICATION IS IMPERMISSIBLE WHEN
THE PLAINTIFF CHALLENGES EMPLOYMENT
POLICIES THAT ARE NOT UNIFORM OR COMMON .. 12
A. To establish the predominance of common issues
required for class certification, plaintiffs must
show the uniform application of a common policy ... 12
B. Plaintiffs did not meet their burden of showing
the uniform application of a common policy ............. 16
II. INDIVIDUALIZED ISSUES CONCERNING THE
RIGHT TO RECOVER PRECLUDE CLASS
CERTIFICATION·····························'··································· 20
A. The right to recover is an issue of liability ............... 20
B. Plaintiffs' authorities address class certification
despite individuality in damages issues, not
individuality in liability issues here ......................... 22
C. Individuality in damages issues can also show
the absence of commonality ...................................... 25
III. THE CERTIFICATION OF A CLASS HERE
VIOLATES DEFENDANT'S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS .... 27
1
A. Defendant has a due process right to be heard
and to present every available defense to class
actions ......................................................................... 27
B. Class certification here violated defendant's due
process right to litigate individualized defenses ...... 31
1. The certification of a class in this case
violated the due process prohibition
against trials by formula ................................. 31
2. Wal-Mart's limitation on trials by formula
applies in both federal and state court class
actions ............................................................... 37
C. A trial by formula ostensibly limited to damages
would also violate due process .................................. 41
D. If allowed, a trial by formula would unfairly
pressure defendants to settle class actions and
burden the state's economy ....................................... 44
CONCLUSION ............................................................................... 46
CERTIFICATE OF WORD COUNT ............................................. 4 7
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE AMICI
CURIAE BRIEF ............................................................................. 48
11
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Page(s)
CASES
Agnew v. State Bd. of Equalization
(1999) 21 Cal.4th 310 ................................................................ 23
Altman v. Manhattan Savings Bank
(1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 761 ................................................... 25, 26
Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor
(1997) 521 U.S. 591 [117 S.Ct. 2231, 138 L.Ed.2d 689] .......... 30
Apple Computer, Inc. v. Superior Court
(2005) ·126 Cal.App.4th 1253 .................................................... 37
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. AT&T Corp.
(5th Cir. 2003) 339 F.3d 294 ..................................................... 26
Benton v. Telecom Network Specialists, Inc.
(2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 701 ................................................ 23, 24
Bridge v. Phoenix Bond & Indem. Co.
(2008) 553 U.S. 639 [128 S.Ct. 2131, 170 L.Ed.2d 1012] ........ 29
Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court
(2012) 53 Cal.4th 1004 ....................................................... passim
Broussard v. Meineke Discount Muffler Shops, Inc.
(4th Cir. 1998) 155 F.3d 331. .................................................... 26
Bruce v. Teleflora, LLC
(C.D.Cal., Dec. 18, 2013, No. 2:13-cv-03279-0DW(CWx))
[2013 WL 6709939] ................................................................... 43
Carrera v. Bayer Corp.
(3d Cir. 2013) 727 F.3d 300 ................................................ 33, 36
Cellphone Termination Fee Cases
(2009) 180 Cal.App.4th 1110 .................................................... 37
111
City of Boerne v. Flores
(1997) 521 U.S. 507 [117 S.Ct. 2157, 138 L.Ed.2d 624] .......... 38
City of San Diego v. Haas
(2012) 207 Cal.App.4th 472 .................................................. 9, 39
City of San Jose v. Superior Court
(197 4) 12 Cal. 3d 44 7 .......................................................... passim
Collins v. Rocha
(1972) 7 Cal.3d 232 ...............- .................................................... 26
Comcast Corp. v. Behrend
(2013) 569 U.S._ [133 S.Ct. 1426, 185 L.Ed.2d 515] ..... passim
Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay
(1978) 437 U.S. 463 [98 S.Ct. 2454, 57 L.Ed.2d 351] .............. 44
Cummings v. Starbucks Corp.
(C.D.Cal., Mar. 24, 2014, No. CV 12-06345-MWF
(FFMx)) 2014 WL 1379119 ....................................................... 20
Daar v. Yellow Cab Co.
(1967) 67 Cal.2d 695 ................................................................. 25
Dailey v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
(2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 974 ................................................ 16, 41
Danzig v. Superior Court
(1978) 87 Cal.App.3d 604 ......................................................... 37
Deposit Guaranty Nat. Bank, Etc. v. Roper
(1980) 445 U.S. 326 [100 S.Ct. 1166, 63 L.Ed.2d 427] ............ 28
Elkins v. Superior gourt
(2007) 41 Cal. 4th 1337 .............................................................. 37
Faulkinbury v. Boyd & Associates, Inc.
(2013) 216 Cal.App.4th 220 ................................................ 23, 24
Feitelberg v. Credit Suisse First Boston, LLC
(2005) 134 Cal.App.4th 997 ...................................................... 29
IV
Fireside Bank v. Superior Court
(2007) 40 Cal.4th 1069 ........................................................ 12, 19
Fran:co v. Connecticut General Life Ins.
Co~
(D.N.J., Apr. 14, 2014, No. 07-6039 (SRC)) _ F.Supp.2d
_ [2014 WL 1415949] ............................................................. 43
Frieman v. San Rafael Rock Quarry, Inc.
(2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 29 ........................................................ 22
Fuhrman v. California Satellite Systems
(1986) 179 Cal.App.3d 408 ................................................. 21, 26
Goldberg v. Kelly
(1970) 397 U.S. 254 [90 S.Ct. 1011, 25 L.Ed.2d 287] .............. 27
Gomez v. Lincare, Inc.
(2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 508 .................................................. 3, 17
Gonzalez v. Millard Mall Services, Inc.
(S.D.Cal. 2012) 281 F.R.D. 455 ................................................ 39
Granberry v. !slay Investments
(1995) 9 Cal.4th 738 .................................................................. 29
Grannis v. Ordean
(1914) 234 U.S. 385 [34 S.Ct. 779, 58 L.Ed. 1363] .................. 27
Honda Motor Co., Ltd. v. Oberg
(1994) 512 U.S. 415 [114 S.Ct. 2331, 129 L.Ed.2d 336] .......... 30
In re Brooklyn Navy Yard Asbestos Litigation
(2d Cir. 1992) 971 F.2d 831 ...................................................... 33
In re Fibreboard Corp.
(5th Cir. 1990) 893 F.2d 706 ............................................... 33, 45
In re Principal U.S. Property Account ERISA Litigation
(S.D. Iowa, Sept. 30, 2013, No. 4:10-cv-00198-JEG) 2013
WL 7218827 ............................................................................... 27
In re Tobacco II Cases
(2009) 46 Cal.4th 298 .............................................. 19, 28, 32, 40
v
Jacob v. Duane Reade, Inc.
(S.D.N.Y. 2013) 293 F.R.D. 578 .......................................... 38, 42
Kaldenbach v. Mutual of Omaha Life Ins. Co.
(2009) 178 Cal.App.4th 830 ...................................................... 19
La Sala v. American Sav. & Loan Assn.
(1971) 5 Cal. 3d 864 ................................................................... 37
Lindsey v. Normet
(1972) 405 U.S. 56 [92 S.Ct. 862, 31 L.Ed.2d 36] .............. 28, 45
Lockheed Martin Corp. v. Superior Court
(2003) 29 Cal.4th 1096 .................................................. 15, 21, 24
Lopez v. Brown
(2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 1114 ................................................ 9, 16
Matter of Rhone-Poulenc Rorer Inc.
(7th Cir. 1995) 51 F.3d 1293 ............................................... 44, 45
McLaughlin v. American Tobacco Co.
(2d Cir. 2008) 522 F.3d 215 ...................................................... 33
Morgan v. Wet Seal, Inc.
(2012) 210 Cal.App.4th 1341 .............................................. 16, 22
Newton v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith
(3d Cir. 2001) 259 F.3d 154 ................................................ 33, 44
Nickey v. State of Mississippi
(1934) 292 U.S. 393 [54 S.Ct. 743, 78 L.Ed. 1323] .................. 28
Osborne v. Subaru of America, Inc.
(1988) 198 Cal.App.3d 646 ....................................................... 26
Owens v. Local No. 169
(9th Cir. 1992) 971 F.2d 347 ........................................................ 3
Parko v. Shell Oil Co.
(7th Cir. 2014) 739 F.3d 1083 ................................................... 19
People v. Coleman
(1975) 13 Cal.3d 867 ................................................................. 28
Vl
People v. Pacific Land Research Co.
(1977) 20 Cal.3d 10 ................................................................... 30
Perry v. Thomas
(1987) 482 U.S. 483 [107 S.Ct. 2520, 96 L.Ed.2d 426] ............ 38
Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Scott
(2010) 561 U.S._ [131 S.Ct. 1, 177 L.Ed.2d 1040] .............. 36
Philip Morris USA v. Williams
(2007) 549 U.S. 346 [127 S.Ct. 1057, 166 L.Ed.2d 940] .......... 28
Postal Telegraph Cable Co. v. City of Newport, K. Y.
(1918) 247 U.S. 464 [38 S.Ct. 566, 62 L.Ed. 1215] .................. 30
Richards v. Jefferson County, Ala.
(1996) 517 U.S. 793 [116 S.Ct. 1761, 135 L.Ed.2d 76] ............ 30
S.E.C. v. Tambone
(1st Cir. 2010) 597 F.3d 436 ..................................................... 45
Sacred Heart Health v. Humana Military Healthcare
(11th Cir. 2010) 601 F.3d 1159 ................................................. 40
Sav-On Drug Stores, Inc. v. Superior Court
(2004) 34 Cal.4th 319 ................................................................ 25
Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Ins.
(2010) 559 U.S. 393 [130 S.Ct. 1431, 176 L.Ed.2d 311] .... 29, 32
Sikes v. Teleline, Inc.
(11th Cir. 2002) 281 F.3d 1350 ................................................. 29
Silberg v. Anderson
(1990) 50 Cal.3d 205 ................................................................. 21
Slapikas v. First American Title Ins. Co.
(W.D.Pa., Mar. 7, 2014, No. 06-0084) _ F.R.D. _
[2014 WL 899355] ..................................................................... 43
Soderstedt v. CBIZ Southern California, LLC
(2011) 197 Cal.App.4th 133 ................................................ 14, 18
Vll
Southern California Edison Co. v. Superior Court
(1972) 7 Cal.3d 832 ................................................................... 37
Southwestern Refining Co., Inc. v. Bernal
(Tex. 2000) 22 S.W.3d 425 .................................................. 34, 36
Starbucks Corp. v. Superior Court
(2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 1436 ....................................................... 6
Steering Committee v. Exxon Mobil Corp.
(5th Cir. 2006) 461 F.3d 598 ..................................................... 26
Stiller v. Costco Wholesale Corp.
(S.D.Cal., Apr. 15, 2014, No. 3:09-cv-2473-GPC-BGS) _
F.R.D. _ [2014 WL 1455440] ..................................... 35, 41, 42
Stone v. Advance America
(S.D.Cal. 2011) 278 F.R.D. 562 ................................................ 42
Stonebridge Life Ins. Co. v. Pitts
(Tex. 2007) 236 S.W.3d 201 ...................................................... 34
Taylor v. Sturgell
(2008) 553 U.S. 880 [128 S.Ct. 2161, 171 L.Ed.2d 155] .......... 38
Thompson v. Automobile Club of Southern California
(2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 719 ................................................ 15, 21
United States v. Armour & Co.
(1971) 402 U.S. 673 [91 S.Ct. 1752, 29 L.Ed.2d 256] .............. 28
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes
(2011) 564 U.S._ [131 S.Ct. 2541, 180 L.Ed.2d 374] ..... passim
Wang v. Chinese Daily News, Inc.
(9th Cir. 2013) 737 F.3d 538 ..................................................... 39
Western Elec. Co., Inc. v. Stern
(3d Cir. 1976) 544 F.2d 1196 .................................................... 34
Wilens v. TD Waterhouse Group, Inc.
(2003) 120 Cal.App.4th 7 46 ...................................................... 22
Vlll
Williams v. Superior Court
(2013) 221 Cal.App.4th 1353 .............................................. 38, 39
Windham v. American Brands, Inc.
(4th Cir.1977) 565 F.2d 59 ....................................................... 26 ·
CONSTITUTIONS
United States Constitution, 14th Amend.§ ! ........................ 10, 27
California Constitution
art. I, § 7 .............................................................................. 10, 27
art. I, § 15 ............................................................................ 10, 27
STATUTES
28 U.S.C. § 2072(b) ........................................................................ 32
Code of Civil Procedure,§ 382 ...................................................... 19
RULES OF COURT
California Rules of Court
§ 8.200(c) ....................................................................................... l
§ 8.200(c)(3) .................................................................................. 2
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
Rule 23(b)(2) ........................................................................ 38, 39
Rule 23(b)(3) .............................................................................. 39
MISCELLANEOUS
Advisory Com. Notes, 28 U.S.C. Appen. ....................................... 30
Friendly, Federal Jurisdiction: A General View (1973) .............. 45
Ghoshray, Hijacked by Statistics, Rescued by Wal-Mart v.
Dukes: Probing Commonality and Due Process Concerns
in Modern Class Action Litigation
(2012) 44 Loy. U. Chi. L.J. 467 ................................................. 32
Nagareda, Aggregation and Its Discontents: Class
Settlement Pressure, Class-Wide Arbitration, and CAFA
(2006) 106 Colum. L.Rev. 1872 ................................................ 44
IX