The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court - the state’s highest court - has reinstated a lawsuit filed by Massachusetts employees claiming the Wal-Mart pressured them to work off the clock and denied them rest and meal breaks.

These wage cases are probably becoming a familiar thing for those that follow Wal-Mart in the news. In fact, at this point its becoming surprising when Wal-Mart doesn’t do something illegal...even the company’s “save money, live better” tagline probably breaks some sort of law (truth-in-advertising comes to mind?). This particular Massachusetts wage case is impressive though, if only because of the long and winding road it has taken just in order to get back essentially to where it started.

To summarize as briefly as possible: Salvas v. Wal-Mart was initially filed in 2001 in Middlesex (MA) Superior Court, alleging Wal-Mart of illegally altering timecards in order to decrease payroll expenses, including clocking employees out just one minute after they had clocked in. The suit also alleged that employees were deprived of their meal and rest breaks. The case was certified as a class action in January of 2004, and then again on December 30, 2004 (Wal-Mart successfully appealed in between), on behalf of 65,000 or so present and former Wal-Mart employees. After Wal-Mart appealed (again), the case ended up back in Superior Court, where a third judge decided that the plainffs’ expert testimony should be excluded and decertified the class on the basis that each associate’s situation was unique, and therefore class action certification was improper.

The case was appealed again (this time by the plaintiffs) and it made it all the way to the Supreme Judicial Court, which heard oral arguments in May of this year. Today, the SJC finally released its opinion, which included the following:

In essence we are asked to determine (1) whether the judge abused his discretion by (a) allowing Wal-Mart’s motion to exclude the testimony of the plaintiffs’ principal expert, Dr. Martin Shapiro, as unreliable, and (b) allowing Wal-Mart’s motion to decertify the class of approximately 67,500 current and former hourly workers employed by Wal-Mart in Massachusetts for more than a ten-year period; and (2) whether the judge erred in granting summary judgment to Wal-Mart on all of the plaintiffs’ claims concerning meal breaks, as well as certain of the plaintiffs’ claims under the payment of wages law, G.L. c. 149, § 148, for failure to compensate the plaintiffs for the time they worked.

For the reasons set forth below, we vacate the judge’s orders. We conclude, inter alia, that the judge abused his discretion in allowing Wal-Mart’s motions to exclude the testimony of the plaintiffs’ expert and to decertify the class. We further conclude that the judge erred in granting partial summary judgment to Wal-Mart. We remand the case for the entry of an order certifying the class and for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

So, there you go. The class has been certifed again. Good deal. The case now goes back to the trial court for certification, after which a jury trial may not be too far off. You can read more about Wal-Mart’s wage cases here. The SJC opinion is here, and it is not exactly complimentary of the superior court judge that decertified the case.

Mass. court reinstates lawsuit against Wal-Mart [Associated Press via Boston Herald]

Several retailers including Wal-Mart have been named in a nationwide class action for their participation in selling polycarbonate plastic baby bottles and toddler training cups containing the controversial hormone BPA.

This whole BPA - or Bisphenol-A - controversy is not a good thing. BPA is a key compound used in polycarbonate plastics, which are clear and nearly shatter-proof (a good thing), and also possibly toxic and poisoning us and our children daily (apparently bad...very, very bad). These plastics are used to make a variety of common products including baby and water bottles, sports equipment, medical devices, lenses, CDs, and household electronics...a fact that, in the interest of full disclosure, actually made me check the bottom of my water bottle this morning to make sure I wasn’t slowly killing myself.

The lawsuit in question was filed in Georgia, and you can read the (very long) complaint here, in which defendants are accused of manufacturing and selling materials made with BPA despite knowledge of likely adverse affects. In addition to Wal-Mart, retailers such as CVS, Target, and Kroger have been named in the suit. Also named were manufacturers of the bottles themselves, including Evenflo, Gerber, and Playtex. The best part of this whole thing - not only have over a hundred studies been produced in the last decade warning of the adverse affects of BPA, but apparently in deeming the compound safe the FDA decided to rely on only two, both of which were produced by the American Plastics Council. So kudos to the FDA for that.

The lawsuit has been filed in the U.S District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. You can read the release on it below.

Nationwide Consumer Class Action Lawsuit Filed in Georgia Against Baby Bottle Manufacturers [MarketWatch]

Read the rest of this story ...