Results in Representative Matters
The following are results that Welter has obtained in representative matters since the firm’s inception:
State-Wide Class Action [California]
The firm obtained a final summary judgment for its client in a state-wide class action alleging violations of California Business and Professions Code Section 17200 and breach of contract relating to operation of a franchise payroll system. The case was litigated in the Superior Court for Imperial County, California for three years before the trial court dismissed all claims against our client on summary judgment. Kimberly Aleksick v. 7-Eleven, Inc., No. ECU03615 (Imperial County Superior Court, California). [click here to review] In 2012, the firm was successful in defending the summary judgment on appeal before the California Court of Appeal, Fourth District. Kimberly Aleksick v. 7-Eleven, Inc., No. D059236 (California Ct. App., 4th Dist.). [click here to review]
OFCCP Investigation & Audit [Federal]
The firm successfully resolved a two-year Department of Labor OFCCP investigation and audit of a government contractor client’s affirmative action plan with a conciliation agreement that resulted in no financial penalties or back wages.
Workers’ Compensation [Virginia]
In a case alleging negligent hiring, negligent retention and assault in the Circuit Court for the City of Richmond, the firm prevailed on a plea in bar arguing that the claims were precluded by the exclusive remedy provisions of the Virginia Workers’ Compensation Act. The case was dismissed with prejudice.
Contract & Franchise Dispute [California]
The firm obtained the dismissal of all claims against its franchisor client in the Los Angeles Superior Court and successfully defended the judgment on appeal to the California Court of Appeal. The case involved tortious interference with contract and prospective economic advantage claims in connection with the sale of a franchise. Stephanie Price v. 7-Eleven, Inc., et al., No. B212597 (Cal. Ct. App., 2d Dist., 2009) (unpublished). [click here to review]
Breach of Contract [Virginia]
The firm was successful in prosecuting an appeal to the Virginia Supreme Court from an adverse jury verdict on a breach of contract claim before the Circuit Court for Henrico County, Virginia. The Virginia Supreme Court unanimously held that the plaintiff’s breach of contract claims were barred by the statute of limitations and reversed.
Wage & Hour / Independent Contractor [California and Federal]
In an important opinion later cited by the California Supreme Court, the firm obtained a written summary judgment opinion in a wage and hour case. The case involved claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the California Labor Code alleging that our client was a joint employer with its franchisee. The court rejected this claim, upholding the independent contractor relationship. Singh v. 7-Eleven, Inc., 2007 WL 715488 (N.D.Cal. 2007). [click here to review]
Breach of Contract / Noncompetition [Virginia]
The firm defended an individual client in a week-long jury trial before the Circuit Court for Fairfax County, Virginia, in a case alleging breach of fiduciary duty, conversion of confidential information and tortious interference with contractual relations. The plaintiff corporation alleged that the firm’s client had unlawfully recruited its former employees and sole customer to the benefit of a competitor. Facing potential exposure of $2 million if the plaintiff was awarded treble damages and attorneys’ fees under the Virginia conspiracy statute, the jury returned a verdict of only $30,000 against our client and did not find a conspiracy (which precluded the plaintiff from recovering its attorneys’ fees from our client).
Severance Dispute [Virginia]
After nine years of bankruptcy proceedings, our clients recovered 100% of unpaid severance owed to a group of former executives of the bankrupt airplane manufacturer pursuant to their employment agreements.
Any information contained on this website with respect to results obtained by Welter Law Firm lawyers is not meant to indicate that the same or similar results can or will be obtained in other cases or situations. Results will vary depending on the facts and circumstances of each individual matter. Prior results do not predict, warrant or guarantee a similar outcome. Images may be those of actors depicting fictional scenes. References to past or present clients or the circumstances of their specific matters do not constitute testimonials or endorsements by such clients, nor are they a guaranty, warranty or prediction of the outcome of your legal matter.