In Duran v. US Bank, N.A, the California Supreme Court clarified the methods of proof permitted in class action cases. There, loan officers for the bank sued for overtime, claiming they were misclassified as exempt employees under the outside salesperson exemption. The case went to trial. The trial court devised a plan to determine liability as to all class members, by extrapolating from a limited sample of employees (about 8%). The evidence was limited to the work habits of those in the sample only. Based on that limited sample, the trial court found liability. The Appellate Court reversed due to the flawed method in the trial plan. The Court stated that the plan improperly denied the bank the opportunity from showing that some class members were exempt and entitled to no recovery. It stated that while statistical sampling may be appropriate in certain class actions, any trial plan that relies on statistical sampling must be developed with expert input and must afford the defendant an opportunity to impeach the model or otherwise show its liability is reduced.

For more information, or if you need legal assistance, please contact the Wagner Legal Group, P.C. at (310) 857-5293 or fill out our contact form on the website.