Avanti Law Group has been extensively involved in class-action litigation in state and federal courts. While most of our experience is in asserting class-action litigation, our expertise in all relevant issues enables us to advise and represent clients effectively from any standpoint.
We pride ourselves in providing the highest quality legal representation to clients who would not be able to obtain effective redress for their injuries but for the availability of the class action device. The cases we litigate prosecuting the class, are generally taken on contingency, at no cost to the client, with our fee tied to the benefit obtained for the class. In defense case, a different fee structure applies.
Attorney Alvarez has been first and second chair trial litigation and negotiation practice in high profile class action cases, including:
· Aguilera, et al., vs. Michigan Turkey Producers Cooperative, W.D. Mich. 2009. Representing proposed class of meat processing workers for alleged violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Collective action certified – Resolved.
· Obando et al., vs. Belfor USA Group, Inc. et al., E.D. La. 2006. Representing potential class of approximately 10,000 workers (Brazilian and Mexican immigrants) in a Nationwide Hybrid collective/Rule 23 class action against subcontractor and general contractor for alleged violation of the FLSA and the wage and hour laws of various states – Resolved.
· Miro Aldoman Saucedo et al., vs. Five Star Contractors, L.L.C., et al., S.D. MS. 2009 – Representing class of approximately 2000+ workers (Brazilian and Mexican immigrants) against subcontractor and general contractor in Hybrid collective/Rule 23 class action for alleged violation of the FLSA, RICO and breach of contract – Currently in litigation.
· Juan Doe et al., vs. Mary Hollinrake, Clerk for the County of Kent, et al., U.S. District Court – Western District of Michigan: Class action lawsuit alleging violation of Constitutional rights including fundamental right to marry due to a policy which effectively denied marriage licenses to U.S. citizens who were to marry undocumented individuals based solely on their lack of a social security number. Filed in cooperation with the law firm of Sommers Schwartz, P.C. – Resolved.
· Juan Doe et al., vs. Daniel C. Krueger, Clerk for the County of Ottawa, et al., U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan: Class action lawsuit alleging violation of Constitutional rights including fundamental right to marry due to a policy which effectively denied marriage licenses to U.S. citizens who were to marry undocumented individuals based solely on their lack of a social security number. Filed in cooperation with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF). Currently in litigation.
· Guerrero et al., vs. Brickman Group, LLC et al., W.D. Mich. 2005. Represented class of approximately 900 foreign guest workers (Mexican Nationals) in Hybrid Collective/Rule 23 class action for alleged violations of the FLSA and various state claims – Resolved.
· Galaviz Zamora et al., vs. Brady Farms, Inc. et al., W.D. Mich. 2004. Represented potential class of approximately 1,000 migrant farmworkers (Mexican immigrants) in hybrid collective/Rule 23 class action against their employer for alleged violations of the FLSA and the MSAWPA – Resolved.
· Bautista et al., vs. Twin Lakes Farms, Inc. et al., W.D. Mich. 2004. Represented class of approximately 1,000 migrant farmworkers (Mexican immigrants) in hybrid collective/Rule 23 class action against their employer for alleged violation of the FLSA and the MSAWPA – Resolved.
Published Decisions
· Lima et al., vs. International Catastrophe Solutions, Inc. et al., 493 F.Supp.2d 793 (E.D. La. June 27, 2007) conditionally certifying class of workers seeking unpaid wages under the FLSA and allowing for distribution of notice to the class.
· Guerrero et al., vs. Brickman Group, L.L.C. et al., 2007 WL 922420 (W.D. Mich. March 26, 2007) Certifying Rule 23 class of foreign guest workers seeking damages for breach of contract under H2B program.
· Bautista, et al., vs. Twin Lakes Farms, Inc. et al., 2007 WL 329162 (W.D. Mich 2007) Certification and approval of Settlement Class and Settlement in which attorney Alvarez was lead litigator and negotiator of settlement.
· Galaviz Zamora et al., v. Brady Farms, Inc. et al., 2005 WL 2372326 (W.D. Mich. September 23, 2005) Plaintiffs’ Immigration status not relevant and not discoverable in class/collective employment litigation action -issue of first impression.
· Garcia-Andrate et al., v. Madra’s Café Corp. et al., 2005 WL 2430195 (E.D.Mich., August 03, 200) Plaintiff’s immigration status was determined not relevant and not discoverable. The court also affirmed the worker’s right to assert their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination with regard to their immigration status and possible unlawful employment – issue of first impression.
Contact us to discuss how we our winning approach can help you.
