On May 26, 2009 an appeal brief was entered:

Definitive Text of the Brief of Appellees

---

On September 3, 2008 the court has entered an opinion:

 

J. Bernstein’s Opinion

Phila. judge adds $49.2M in attorney fees to Wal-Mart tally
By Jane M. Von Bergen
INQUIRER STAFF WRITER

A Philadelphia judge ruled that Wal-Mart Stores Inc. must pay $49.2 million in attorneys fees and expenses bringing the total to $187.6 million owed to Pennsylvania employees who were not paid during rest breaks.

The total - $187,648,589.11 - awarded by Common Pleas Court Judge Mark I. Bernstein, represents the entire tally in the class action case that went on trial a year ago in Philadelphia and resulted in a $78.8 million jury verdict against the Arkansas discounter.

Last month, the judge awarded an additional $62.3 million in damages, for a total of $141.1 million.

The case involved 187,000 former and current Wal-Mart employees in Pennsylvania.

Today's ruling gives the workers an additional $10.2 million in interest and sets attorneys fees and expenses in the case.

In total, the lawyers will earn $49.2 million in fees and expenses with Wal-Mart having to pay $36.5 million of those fees on top of the $151.3 million in damages and interest. The balance, or $12.7 million, will be split among the plaintiffs.

"Obviously we will appeal the case," Wal-Mart spokesman John Simley said. "It was a flawed decision. We respect the court and the jury, but we strongly disagree with the decision."

Simley said it is Wal-Mart's policy to pay workers for every hour they work.

The jury agreed with plaintiffs who complained that they were forced to skip rest breaks and also had to work some time off the clock. However, the jury found in Wal-Mart's favor on the issue of lunch breaks.

Michael Donovan of Donovan Searles L.L.C., of Philadelphia was the lead plaintiffs' attorney in the case.

Donovan's firm will not get the entire $49.2 million. He and his firm were assisted by other attorneys across the nation who share discovery strategies and expertise in these large and data-intensive cases.

A class-action case on similar issues is now being heard by a judge in Minnesota.

Initially, there were two Philadelphia cases - one filed in March 2002 and the other filed in August 2004. In December 2005, Bernstein granted class-action status, combining the cases.

J. Bernstein's Finding of Fact on Braun v. Wal-Mart 11-14-07

Opinion of J. Bernstein on Braun v. Wal-Mart 11-14-07

J. Bernstein's Order on Braun v. Wal-Mart 11-14-07

Court Awards Class Members an additional $62.3 million in statutory damages.

The award by Common Pleas Court Judge Mark I. Bernstein, which amounts to about $500 per worker, came on top of the $78.5 million awarded by a Philadelphia jury nearly a year ago after a five-week trial in the class-action case. The Court ordered Wal-Mart Stores Inc. to pay $62.3 million in statutory damages to 124,506 current and former Pennsylvania employees of the company from 2002 through May 2006 who were not paid when they worked during rest breaks.

In October 2006, the jury found that Wal-Mart did not compensate workers for time they had worked without pay and for missed breaks, and that the company had no good reason for this. The jury found that Wal-Mart had saved more than $49 million by not paying workers properly. "The jury found the defendant Wal-Mart abused their workers" in a way that can be remedied by the Pennsylvania Wage Payment and Collection Law, the judge wrote in his opinion.

The class in the case numbers 187,000 workers and covers pay missed between March 1998 and May 2006. The $62.3 million extra applies to 124,506 workers employed between January 2002 and May 2006, while the statute of limitations was still in effect.

In his 12-page opinion, Judge Bernstein stressed the importance of compensating workers for their time.

"The law in its majesty applies equally to highly paid executives and minimum-wage clerks," he wrote. "Just as highly paid executives' promised equity interests . . . are protected fringe benefits and wage supplements . . ., so too [are] the monetary equivalents of 'paid break' time cashiers and other employees were prohibited from taking."

Opinion of J. Bernstein on Braun v. Wal-Mart 10-3-07

On October 13, 2006 a Philadelphia jury returned a $78.5 million verdict in favor of a class of current or former employees of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (including Wal-Mart Discount Stores, Supercenters and SAM’s Clubs) who were forced to miss rest breaks and work off-the-clock in Wal-Mart’s Pennsylvania stores during the period March 19, 1998 through May 1, 2006.  After a five-week trial, the jury found that Wal-Mart violated state laws and breached their agreement to provide paid rest breaks and to pay for all time that employees worked off-the-clock.  The parties will likely be filing numerous post-trial motions, and Wal-Mart has publicly stated that it plans to appeal the jury verdict. 

Publication Notice

Notice of Pendency of Class Action

On December 27, 2005, the Court granted plaintiffs' motions for Class Certification. 
Braun Order Granting Class Certification
Hummel Order Granting Class Certification
Order and Memorandum Opinion

On June 7, 2004 plaintiff Michelle Braun filed her motion for Class Certification and on December 6, 2004 plaintiff Dolores Hummel filed her motion for Class Certification

On August 30, 2004 plaintiff Dolores Hummel filed her Class Action Complaint
Hummel Class Action Complaint

On May 28, 2002 plaintiff Michelle Braun filed her Second Amended Class Action Complaint
Braun Second Amended Class Action Complaint

 

Home

Case Developments

Attorneys

Contact Us