Earlier, Liss-Riordan said that if the court does not approve the settlement, "if we need to go to the 9th circuit, I will do that."
-
-
Geragos: If these are worthless, why were they in mediation?
-
On settling out someone's case: Chen: What case says you can’t do that? Geragos: ... I'd say it's just fairness. Due process.
-
aka I have no caselaw
-
Chen says Geragos brings up an interesting question.
-
Chen: Whose rights are being violated by expanding out the scope of this case? Class members, or counsel?
-
Another objector speaking and Chen says to keep it short because there are "30 other issues." SLR will also get her chance at rebuttal.
-
Other objector (please chime in with name) is bringing in actual caselaw.
-
Liss-Riordan: Mr. Shkolnik wanted on the eve of trial to transfer this case to Texas.
-
Boutrous: Ms. Liss-Riordan is the only one in the room who represents all the drivers in California.
-
This is so fucking uncanny after the last time I saw these two in court.
-
Chen says that it seems that SLR's named plaintiffs have no experience with some of the new claims (worker's comp).
-
SLR says that the worker's comp's claim is "novel" and there is no precedent for it.
-
So weird to see Boutrous in court without being in 200% "I Will Destroy You" mode. He's in "What the fuck am I even doing here" mode
-
Morosoff (one of the objectors) is talking up the minimum wage claim—the claim that drivers should be paid for time spent waiting for rides
-
Says it's worth much more than zero.
-
SLR: Your honor, you'll remember the three or four times I passionately argued that there were overtime and minimum wage claims
-
SLR: and you rejected them.
-
SLR: To say I walked away from those claims is patently a misrepresentation. SLR is furious.
-
Chen interrupts gently. Says now that none of the objectors have talked about arbitration.
-
SLR is saying that the arbitration question was a risk to both her side and to Uber's side, and was part of what propelled the settlement.
-
(Earlier in the litigation: Arbitration clauses in some of the driver contracts were deemed unenforceable. Big victory for SLR).
-
Chen now pursuing a thought experiment, re: someone who opts out and pursues the worker classification claim.
-
SLR says it would be an injunction under Rule 23(b)(2). Chen turns to Boutrous: You agree that could be brought?
-
Boutrous kind of laughs. "I’m going to say no as a cautionary matter."
-
SLR says re: the worker classification issue, a driver can opt-out and "go it alone," and that's something that happens in other cases.
-
Boutrous says that, "This settlement is a landmark and it advances the entire enterprise [of the legal system]."
-
"I don't want that to get lost."
-
We're now discussing the potential value of a PAGA claim (Private Attorney General Act).
-
There are so many lawyers standing at the front now, it's like two layers deep now. Layers of lawyers
- 6 réponses de plus
Nouvelle conversation -
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.