DMcCracken, Stemerman & Holsberry, LLP

Photo: Women on a factory line
<< Page 2 of 4 >>

News Archive

January 26, 2007

In Magana v. Woodfin Suite Hotels, Alameda Superior Court Case No. RG06291309, hotel workers won their 2nd restraining order preserving their jobs against being fired for Social Security no-matchs. These workers had complained in August 2006 to their employer and the City of Emeryville about the hotel not complying with the City's new living wage ordinance, but then workers were told in September that they would be let go due to the lack of match between the social security numbers they provided at time of hire and numbers on file with SSA (even though the employer had repeatedly been told in prior years about these no-matches and not taken any prior action to require workers to fix their numbers). The Court relied in part on the City's enactment recently of a supplemental ordinance sharply limiting employers' ability to discharge workers while their administrative complaints are pending before the City. The current court order precluding these discharges is good until April 20th.

January 11, 2007

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California ruled that the case against Costco for sex discrimination would go forward as a class action. The class includes all women employed by Costco in the United States (including Puerto Rico) at any time on or after January 3, 2002 who have been denied promotion to Assistant General Manager or General Manager positions or have been denied assignments to Senior Staff Manager positions (Merchandise, Receiving, Administration or Front End Managers). In certifying the class, Judge Marilyn H. Patel noted, “[i]n evaluating all of the evidence presented, the court finds that plaintiffs have presented strong evidence of a common culture at Costco which disadvantages women."

The order is available here. Learn more about the class action case against Costco here.

December 12, 2006

DCB Wins Judgment of $304,000 in Sex Harassment Retaliation Case

DCB successfully represented a plaintiff in a sexual harassment discrimination and retaliation case in a jury trial before the District of Columbia Superior Court. A judgment was issued recently awarding the plaintiff $304,000 in damages, plus attorneys’ fees and costs totaling approximately $180,000.

September 18, 2006

DCB is pleased to welcome Sarah Varela to the San Francisco office. DCB also welcomes Keira McNett back as an associate in the Washington office. Keira was formerly a law clerk for the Washington office.

September 08, 2006

In Nevadans for Nevada et al. v. Beers et al., 142 P.3d 339 (Nev. 2006), the Nevada Supreme Court held unanimously that the Tax and Spending Control for Nevada (TASC) initiative petition should be struck from the November 2006 ballot. The Court ruled that the TASC proponents’ failure to follow the constitutional requirement that an exact copy of the petition be filed with the Secretary of State prior to circulation invalidated the initiative.

TASC would have severely curtailed public services in Nevada by limiting state and local government spending to an inflexible growth formula. The right-wing Americans for Limited Government has targeted similar “taxpayer bill of rights” initiative measures at seven other states this year.

<< Page 2 of 4 >>
We are pleased to announce that Davis, Cowell & Bowe, LLP has changed its name to McCracken, Stemerman & Holsberry, LLP. There is no change in personnel, and we continue working from the same offices in San Francisco and Las Vegas.