This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Employment Law
Fair Labor Standards Act
Wage and Hour

Jeffrey Lapan, Ashwin Chandra, Claudia Bleus, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. PVH Corp., Tommy Hilfiger Retail, LLC; PVH Retail Stores LLC; PVH Wholesale New Jersey Inc.; PVH Neckwear Inc.; PVH Wholesale Corp.; PVH Puerto Rico Inc.; Calvin Klein Inc.; Tommy Hilfiger USA Inc.; PVH Guam Inc.; Warnaco Inc.; Warnaco U.S. In

Published: Dec. 12, 2015 | Result Date: Aug. 7, 2015 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 5:13-cv-05006-LHK Settlement –  $725,000

Court

USDC Northern


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Edward J. Wynne
(Wynne Law Firm)

John E.B. Pickett
(Wynne Law Firm)


Defendant

Samantha Kantor

Dean Hansell
(Los Angeles Court Superior Court)


Facts

Jeffrey Lapan, Ashwin Chandra and Claudia Bleus brought a class action on behalf of themselves and other current and former employees of apparel company PVH Retail Stores LLC and affiliated companies.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiffs contended that defendants paid them through a payroll card program and charged fees, resulting in plaintiffs not receiving their wages free and clear from unlawful deductions. They also contended that some plaintiffs did not receive their statutory minimum wage, overtime compensation, or weren't properly paid their final wages at time of termination.

Plaintiffs asserted claims of common law breach of contract, violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, minimum wage violations, and overtime wage violations, violations of the California Labor Code, violations of California Unfair Competition Law, waiting time penalties and conversion.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants contended, among other things that the use of the payroll card program was lawful, that none of the alleged fees were charged by defendants, defendants received no benefit from them fees, and the plaintiffs were carefully instructed how to use the pay card program in a way to avoid incurring fees.

Result

Defendants agreed to settle the class action for $725,000.

Other Information

FILING DATE: Oct. 25, 2013.


#121146

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390