Case: Boxall v. Los Angeles Times Communications

civ-ds-2010984 | California state trial court

Filed Date: June 4, 2020

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This is a case about the Los Angeles Times' company-wide treatment of hundreds of employees in violation of the California Equal Pay Act, Federal Equal Pay Act, and California's Unfair Compensation Law. On June 4, 2020, Black, Hispanic/Latino, and female employees of LA Times filed this civil class action lawsuit against the LA Times in the Superior Court of California for the County of San Bernardino. The case was assigned to Judge David Cohn. Represented by a private counsel, the plaintiffs s…

This is a case about the Los Angeles Times' company-wide treatment of hundreds of employees in violation of the California Equal Pay Act, Federal Equal Pay Act, and California's Unfair Compensation Law. On June 4, 2020, Black, Hispanic/Latino, and female employees of LA Times filed this civil class action lawsuit against the LA Times in the Superior Court of California for the County of San Bernardino. The case was assigned to Judge David Cohn. Represented by a private counsel, the plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment, permanent injunctive relief, unpaid wages, liquidated damages, compensatory damages, attorneys' fees, and statutory and civil penalties. The plaintiffs claimed:

  1. The defendant favored white (non-Hispanic) and/or male employees which resulted in unlawful pay gaps, in the four to five-figure range annually for many female and minority journalists.
  2. Tenure for veteran white-male employees translated to higher pay. This was not the case for veteran minority-female employees, resulting in a pay gap which has compounded exponentially over their long careers at the LA Times.

The plaintiffs sought class certification for classes of female employees, Black or African-American employees, and/or Hispanic or Latino employees who were/are employed by LA Times in California at any time from four years before filing this complaint through the final judgment. The plaintiffs defined six classes based on race, gender, and job title.

On October 26, 2020, the court certified the settlement class as "all women, Black or African-American employees, or Hispanic or Latino employees (including persons who may belong to more than one of these groups), who are, or have been, employees of the LA Times in California between February 14, 2015, and the date of preliminary approval of the settlement." The court also preliminarily approved the previously filed settlement agreement.

On March 25, 2021, the court ordered the final approval of the class action settlement and granted the motions for attorneys' fees, costs, claims administration expenses, and class representative incentive/service awards. We don't know any details about the settlement because it has not been released.

Almost a year later, on March 24, 2022, the court amended the final approval to grant the class action settlement, attorneys' fees, costs, claims administration expenses, and class representative incentive/service awards were granted in their entirety. This settlement was also kept private, so we don't know any details about the terms or the differences from the prior settlement.

Summary Authors

Calvin Kim (4/1/2022)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

civ-ds-2010984

Docket

Boxall v. LA Times Communication

June 4, 2020

June 4, 2020

Docket

civ-ds-2010984

Complaint

Boxall v. LA Times Communication

2020 WL 7624352

June 4, 2020

June 4, 2020

Complaint

civ-ds-2010984

Revised Order Re: Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary and Conditional Approval of Class Action Settlement

Boxall v. LA Times Communication

2020 WL 7866045

Sept. 9, 2020

Sept. 9, 2020

Order/Opinion

civ-ds-2010984

Order and Amended Judgement Granting Motion for Order Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlement And Motion for Award of Attorney Fees

Boxall v. LA Times Communication

March 24, 2022

March 24, 2022

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

Last updated May 11, 2022, 8 p.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

Case Details

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Key Dates

Filing Date: June 4, 2020

Case Ongoing: No reason to think so

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

all female employees, Black or African-American employees, and/or Hispanic or Latino employees who were/are employed by LA Times in California at any time from four years prior to the case

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

Los Angeles Times (San Bernardino, California), Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

State law

Equal Pay Act, 29 U.S.C. § 206(d)

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Attorneys fees

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Issues

Discrimination-area:

Pay / Benefits

Discrimination-basis:

Race discrimination

Sex discrimination

Race:

Black

Affected Gender:

Female