Paul S. Cowie

Cowie operates on the cutting edge of class action PAGA defense. His philosophy is to find more effective ways to defend companies against class certification and other claims.

"At any one time, I've got 50-plus active matters," Cowie said. "That means we're always at the forefront because we're always dealing with the latest trend, always arguing the latest motion. We're frequently the ones making new arguments that have not yet been tested."

Cowie is so prolific that last year, opposing counsel objected to an argument Cowie made, citing five separate cases. Of those five, three had Cowie's name on them, he said.

"You've got to be innovative and not be afraid to try new arguments," Cowie said. "PAGA is an evolving area of law, and you can either be at the cutting edge of it, helping it evolve to protect your client, or you can just follow along and see where the chips fall. And that's not the kind of practice we have."

Cowie's expertise and acumen exceed state borders. Recently, he traveled to Washington to argue a case alleging wage and hour violations. Representing trucking and shipping company Knight Transportation Inc., he argued in state Supreme Court in May whether work-week averaging was permitted for non-agricultural workers paid on a piece-rate basis. Sampson v. Knight Transportation Inc., 17-CV00028 (W.D. Wash., filed Jan. 6, 2017). "There was a lot of that law which I was familiar with from other cases I've handled, but there was also a lot where I had to dig back into the legislative history," Cowie said. "We're obviously anticipating a decision that goes in the employer's favor. And it's going to impact everybody in Washington who uses piece rates and commissions."

Cowie also represented grocery store operator Save Mart in a pair of class actions. One alleges misclassification of assistant store managers as exempt employees seeking to recover unpaid overtime and meal period wages. Curley v. Save Mart Supermarkets, RG13685740 (Alameda Super. Ct., filed Jun. 28, 20113).

The other class action alleged Save Mart improperly itemized wage statements by not listing the beginning date of the pay period, the number of hours worked and the pay rate. Gutierrez v. Save Mart Supermarkets, CIV530955 (S.M. Super. Ct., filed Oct. 17, 2014).

Though Save Mart's exposure was potentially devastating, Cowie settled the matter favorably with a portion of the settlement paid in gift cards, the first employment matter to include such a provision in a decade, Cowie said.

"I'm imagining my client is extremely satisfied with how that case resolved," Cowie said. "And that's what differentiates us. We're willing to be aggressive about those strategies and not be afraid and to try and push those boundaries.

-- Glenn Jeffers