The California Supreme Court today granted review in Hernandez v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. (October 28, 2010) --- Cal.App.4th ---, 2010 WL 4244583, pending its decision in Brinker v. Superior Court (Hohnbaum). The Court of Appeal in Hernandez -- which I blogged here -- affirmed a trial court order denying class certification of meal and rest period claims on grounds that individual issues predominated over common issues, and class treatment was not superior to individual actions.
This increases the list of Brinker grant-and-holds to five: Brinkley v. Public Storage, Bradley v. Networkers Int'l LLC, Faulkinbury v. Boyd & Associates, Brookler v. Radioshack Corp., and now Hernandez v. Chipotle.
That’s more than the number of licks that it takes to get to the center of a tootsie roll tootsie pop, so here’s hoping that the Supremes will get Brinker on calendar and let us know where we all stand on these cases. BTW, the Court's Brinker case summary is here. You can go to the page and request email alerts, so you'll be the first of your friends to know when they schedule Brinker for oral argument.
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Well, that's not entirely accurate. Mr. Owl only licked three times, and then bit into the pop to get to the center. We may actually never know how many licks it takes to get to the center of a Tootsie Roll Pop.
ReplyDelete