Ayala v. Tito Contractors, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that courts permit 60 and 90 days for plaintiffs to opt in
• requiring production of phone numbers where defendants \raise[d] no special concerns\ and many class members did \not speak English as a first language\
• permitting the discovery of telephone numbers because “many potential plaintiffs do not speak English as a first language—thus making them harder to contact”
• requiring production of phone numbers where defendants “raise[d] no special concerns” and many class members did “not speak English as a first language”
• collecting cases describing the standard of proof as “low,” “lenient,” “flexible,” and “not heavy”
• rejecting as a basis to deny conditional class certification that the defendants' \pay policies are dictated by the individual contractor for each project and do not operate as a uniform scheme\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).