Ninth Circuit Affirms Decertification Of FLSA Off-The-Clock Case

No, that isn't a typo - it was the Ninth Circuit.

Those familiar with collective action litigation are already familiar with the two-step paradigm most courts use to evaluate collective action claims. In the first stage, commonly misnamed "conditional certification," the court determines whether to authorize notice to the putative class. In doing so, most courts apply a modest burden of proof to show that the proposed class members are "similarly situated" under Section 16(b) of the act. Most motions are granted at this stage. Following a period of opt-in and additional discovery, the defendant may file a motion (also commonly misnamed) for decertification. Most such motions are granted either then or on the eve of trial.

In a case decided last week, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the decertification of a pair of FLSA suits that had been litigated for 14 years and, along the way, made several pronouncements regarding the nuances of this process. The decision in Campbell v. City of Los Angeles, Case No. 15-56990 (9th Cir. Sept. 13, 2018), addressed two putative collective actions alleging off-the-clock time in the Los Angeles police department. The primary focus of the case was on short blocks of alleged time worked. The district court granted conditional certification (in one case by stipulation), but after further discovery decertified both cases. Afterwards, the named plaintiffs settled their individual claims. Numerous officers who had opted into the litigation appealed to the Ninth Circuit.

The Ninth Circuit first had to address the issue of whether the appellants had standing to appeal from the decertification order. In the past, the Third Circuit had held in a case with a slightly different procedural history that only the original named plaintiff could appeal. See Halle v. West Penn Allegheny Health System, 842 F.3d 215 (3d Cir. 2016). We blogged that decision here. This was arguably contrary to a later decision of the Eleventh Circuit, Mickles v. Country Club, Inc., 887 F.3d 1270 (11th Cir. 2018), which dealt with appeals from the denial of conditional certification by opt-in plaintiffs. The Ninth Circuit, in line with the Eleventh, found that the voluntary dismissal of the initial plaintiff's claims triggered a right of the opt-ins to challenge the prior ruling affecting them.

Turning to the issue of decertification, the court noted, as it did throughout the opinion, that the FLSA itself says very little about how collective action...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT