More Movement on SB 185

Yesterday, the Assembly further modified SB 185. The notification provision of the earlier amendments weren't that exciting. This adds
  • Court review of settlements for suits brought on behalf of the general public. The procedure for the review is set out.
  • Unions and nonprofit legal services are exempt from court review of the settlements.
  • A notice provision. (You have to send the defendants a poster! Oh, the irony--it has to be 14 point or else you get reported to the Labor Commissioner The State Bar).
  • Party must plead injury in fact for restitution, unless plaintiff is a nonprofit, union, or nonprofit legal service.
So, it's basically Prop. 64, minus some standing requirements, with exemptions for certain kinds of groups.

Sav-On Class Action

The big news, apparently, is that the California Supreme Court approved the certification of a class in Sav-on Drug Stores, Inc. v. Sup. Ct. (Rocher). The Times also has an article. So does the Chronicle.

Both sides respond with talking-points answers. The labor side says that, because the enforcement agencies are underfunded, this is an important decision—CLEL doesn't know how agency funding relates legally to the presence or non-presence of a procedural device. Industry responds, predictably, that this will send more jobs away from California. This talking point is losing credibility over time, when San Bernardino county's net job growth in July was almost equal to that of the entire United States.