Principals at Stevens LC have served as lead counsel in more than 1,000 complex civil litigation actions and achieved injunctive relief for unlawful business conduct in more than 500 matters, recovered over $900 million for consumers and have been involved in significant precedent setting matters at the California Court of Appeal, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal, California Supreme Court and United States Supreme Court.

Notable Representative and Class Actions

$97 million class judgement

(Co-lead class counsel) Ibarra, et al. v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (Case No.: 2:17-cv-04344-PA-AS, United States District Court, Central District of California). Recovery of unpaid compensation.  Obtained Summary Judgement on class wide liability and precedent setting common fund damages judgement on behalf of class of $97,284,817.91.

$95.7 million common fund class settlement

(Co-lead class counsel) Kang v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (Case No.: 5:17-cv-06220, United States District Court, Northern District of California) and Moses v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (Case No.: 3:18-cv-06679, United States District Court, Northern District of California).  Recovery of unpaid  compensation. 

$23.5 million common fund class settlement

(Co-lead class counsel) Flanagan v. Bank of America (Case No.: 613647/2018, Supreme Court of New York, County of Suffolk) and the consolidated proceedings in Fernandez v. Bank of America (Case No: 2:17-cv-06104-MWF-JC, United States District Court, Central District of California). Recovery of unpaid compensation.

  • (Lead class counsel) Wally vs. CCA Industries, Inc. (Case No.: BC422833, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County). Alleged false and deceptive advertising of dietary supplement. $2.2 million benefit to class, $1 million benefit to charity.

  • (Lead class counsel) Abigana vs. Rylock (Case No.: 2002 076625, Superior Court of California, Alameda County). Defective residential windows. $2.1 million recovery.

  • (Lead class counsel) Smith vs. ABC Windows (Case No.: CV025771, Superior Court of California, Riverside County). Defective residential windows.

  • (Lead class counsel) Pagano, et. al. vs. Weather Shield Manufacturing, Inc. (Case No.: C0800609, Superior Court of California, Contra Costa County). Defective residential windows.

  • Penos vs. Zell, et. al. (Case No.: BC398686, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County). Alleged unlawful termination of employee benefits on behalf of hundreds of employees for lost benefits.

  • (Co-lead class counsel) Morales, et. al. vs. Kraft Foods Group, Inc. (Case No.: 2:14-cv- 04387, United States District Court, Central District of California). Alleged false and deceptive advertising of consumer product.

  • (Lead class counsel) Melnick, et. al. v Aluminum Technology, Inc, et. al. (Case No.: RIC 492792, Superior Court of California, Riverside County). Monetary relief for product defects on behalf of owners of certain windows.

  • (Lead class counsel) Imburgia, et. al. vs. DirecTV Inc. (Case No.: BC398295, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County). Alleged unlawful early termination fee.

  • (Lead class counsel) Perez-Pirio, et. al. vs. The Procter & Gamble Company (Case No.: BC485201, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County). Alleged false and deceptive advertising of consumer Anti-Aging Products.

  • (Lead class counsel) Imig vs. Revision, Inc. (Case No.: 2:11-cv-03148, United States District Court, Eastern District of California). Alleged false and deceptive advertising of consumer product Nectifirm.

  • Rico vs L' Ange Hair, Inc. (Case No.: 22STCV38361, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County). Alleged false and deceptive advertising of over counter hair growth product, violation of California Health & Safety Code (Sherman Law). Confidential settlement under seal.

  • Bishil, v. LBF Travel, Inc, et. al. (Case No.: 22STCV20224, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County). Alleged false and deceptive advertising, violation of civil RICO, discount travel service.

  • (Lead class counsel) Gomez vs.Wal-Mart Stores. (Case No.: BC538639, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County). Alleged false and deceptive advertising of consumer product Equate Sensitive Skin Unscented Body Wash.

  • (Lead class counsel) Martin vs. Adidas, Inc. (Case No.: 13-CV-00188, United States District Court, Central District of California). Alleged false and deceptive advertising.

  • (Co-lead Class Counsel) Atkins vs. Obesity Research Institute LLC (Case No.: BC407882, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County). Alleged false and deceptive advertising of consumer product Lipozene.

  • (Lead Class Counsel) Wilkinson vs. Lil’ Drug Store Products, Inc. (Case No.: 37-2007-00074238, Superior Court of California, San Diego County). Alleged false and deceptive advertising of consumer product Legatrin.

  • Beristain v. United Parcel Service (Case No.: 2:23-cv-07241, United States District Court, Central District of California). Insurance bad faith practices.

  • Villasenor v. Arcona Inc. (Case No.: 23STCV06233, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County). PFAS contamination in cosmetic product.

  • (Lead class counsel) Hawley vs. Kao Brands Company (Case No.: BC420775, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County). Alleged false and deceptive advertising of consumer product Jergens Natural Glow.

  • Verges v. Luxottica of America, Inc., et. al. (Case No.: 22STCV37124, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County). Alleged false and deceptive advertising re: effectivenes and benefits of blue light blocking eyewear. Confidential resolution under seal.

  • (Co-lead class counsel) Grair v. GlaxoSmithKline, Inc. ( Case No.: BC288536, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County). False and deceptive advertising of anti-depressant Paxil. $9.5 million class settlement benefit to the class, $1 million benefit to charity.

  • (Co-lead class counsel) Gentilcore v. Bank of America (Case No.: BCV-21-100770, Kern County Superior Court). Recovery of rest break compensation for Mortgage Loan Officers, Senior Mortgage Loan Officers, Financial Center Lending Officers, Financial Center Lending Consultant, and other similar positions. $15 million common fund class settlement.

  • (Co-lead class counsel) Johnson v. U.S. National Bank Association (Case No.: 19-CV-286 JLS, United States District Court, Southern District of California). Recovery of rest break compensation for Mortgage Loan Officers, Senior Mortgage Loan Officers, Financial Center Lending Officers, Financial Center Lending Consultant, and other similar positions. $6,500,000.00 common fund.

  • (Co-lead class counsel) Spencer v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. et .al. (Case No.: CVRI2105323, Superior Court of California, Riverside County). Recovery of rest break compensation for Mortgage Loan Officers, Senior Mortgage Loan Officers, Financial Center Lending Officers, Financial Center Lending Consultant, and other similar positions. $3.5 million common fund class settlement.

  • (Co-lead class counsel) Hallman v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. et. al. (Case No.: 2:18-cv-01190 JLR, United States District Court, Western District of Washington). Recovery of rest break compensation for Mortgage Loan Officers, Senior Mortgage Loan Officers, Financial Center Lending Officers, Financial Center Lending Consultant, and other similar positions. $2 million common fund class settlement.

  • (Co-lead class counsel) Klotzer vs. International Windows (Case No.: FCS 021196, Superior Court of California, Solano County). Defective residential windows. $600 million benefit to the class.

  • (Co-lead class counsel) Deist vs. Viking Industries (Case No.: CV 025771, Superior Court of California, San Joaquin County). Defective residential windows. $210 million benefit to the class.

  • (Co-lead class counsel) Oliver, et al. vs. Atmos Corporation (Case No.: CV 0119362, Superior Court of California, San Joaquin County). Defective residential windows. $9.3 million benefit to the class.

  • (Lead class counsel) Long v. Provide Commerce, Inc. (dba Pro Flowers)(Case No.: BC513925, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County). Alleged false and deceptive advertising, nondislcosure of material term and condition. Secured injunctive and equitable relief.

  • Bitar, v. LYV Life Inc. (Case No.: 23STCV00733, Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County). PFAS contamination feminine hygiene product. Confidential settlement under seal.

Notable Individual Actions

Over $2 million

Conrad v. Farmers (Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County). Recovered more than $2 million on behalf of an elder insured against her insurance company for bad faith insurance claims handling practices arising out of the Northridge Earthquake.

Over $10 million

In Re Hemet Reservoir (Superior Court of California, Riverside County).  Recovered more than $10 million on behalf of a group of individual homeowners against their insurance companies for damages to their homes arising out of a negligent public construction project.

Notable Public Actions

Removal of several elected officials for misappropriation of public funds and violation of the “Open Meeting” Act

Leavit, et. al. v. Ventura County Community College District Board (Superior Court of California, Ventra County).  Represented Ventura County residents in taxpayer lawsuit seeking and accomplishing removal of several elected officials for misappropriation of public funds and violation of the Ralph M. Brown "Open Meeting" Act.

Notable Multi-District Litgations

In Re: Chinese-Manufactured Drywall Products Liability Litigation (MDL 2047 - Hon. Eldon Fallon, United States District Court Eastern District Of Louisiana).

In Re: Actos Products Liability Litigation (California JCCP 4696 - Hon. Kenneth R. Freeman Presiding)(MDL 2299 - United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana).

In Re: Incretin Mimetics Products Liability Litigation (MDL 2452 - Hon. Judge Anthony J. Battaglia, United States District Court, Southern District of California).

In Re: Mirena IUD Products Liability Litigation (MDL No. 2434 – Hon. Cathy Seibel in the United States District Court Southern District of New York.

In Re: Pradaxa (Dabigatran Etexilate) Products Liability Litigation (MDL 2385 - Hon. Daniel Stack, United States District Court, Southern District of Illinois).

In Re: American Medical Systems, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation (MDL 2325 - Hon. Joseph R. Goodwin, United States District Court, Southern District of West Virginia).

In Re: Boston Scientific Corp. Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation (MDL 2326 - Hon. Joseph R. Goodwin, U.S. District Court Southern District of West Virginia).

In Re: Ethicon, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation (MDL 2327 - Hon. Joseph R. Goodwin, U.S. District Court Southern District of West Virginia).

Notable Appellate Decisions

United States Supreme Court

  • DIRECTV, Inc. v. Imburgia, 136 S. Ct. 463 (U.S. 2015).

California Supreme Court

  • Ferra v. Loews Hollywood Hotel, LLC, 11 Cal. 5th 858 (2021).  For California Employment Lawyers Association and Jacqueline F. Ibarra as Amici Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Appellants. Achieved reversal of Ferra v. Loews Hollywood Hotel, LLC, 40 Cal. App. 5th 1239, holding that the term “regular rate of compensation” in Cal. Lab. Code § 226.7(c) has the same meaning as “regular rate of pay” in Cal. Lab. Code § 510(a) and encompasses not only hourly wages but all non-discretionary payments for work performed by the employee.

United States Circuit and State Courts of Appeal

  • Kang v. Fyson, (No. 22-15694, 2022 WL 6943174) (9th Cir. Oct. 12, 2022). Ninth Circuit affirmed district court's denial of objector’s motion to intervene and district court’s approval of a class action settlement.  

  • Ibarra v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 809 F. App'x 361 (9th Cir. 2020).  Affirming judgement in favor of class.

  • Long v. Provide Commerce, Inc., 245 Cal. App. 4th 855, (Cal. App. 2d Dist. March 17, 2016). Prevailed in a matter of first impression regarding applicability of arbitration clause in online browsewrap agreement and order confirmation e-mail.

  • Imburgia v. DIRECTV, Inc., 225 Cal. App. 4th 338 (April 7, 2014), review denied July 23, 2014, rev'd, 577 U.S. 47, 136 S. Ct. 463 (December 14, 2015). Lead litigation and appellate counsel. Prevailed in determination of non-applicability of arbitration clause in consumer services contract. In affirming the lower court's decision, California Court of Appeal split from the Ninth Circuit's decision in Murphy v. DirecTV, Inc., 724 F.3d 1218, 1226 (9th Cir. 2013).

  • Johnson v. GlaxoSmithKline, Inc., 166 Cal. App. 4th 1497 (2008), as modified on denial of reh'g (Oct. 14, 2008).  The second published decision to distinguish Alvarez v. May Dept. Stores Co., 143 Cal.App.4th 1223 (2006), and applied principles of privity and collateral estoppel to class certification issues.