Monte v. Image Distribution Services (which does business as Fontis Solutions) is a putative class action against Fontis on behalf of Account Executives in California. It is a salesperson class action against Fontis Solutions brought under California law, filed on September 26, 2016.
What is the latest update in the case?Last updated: January 7, 2019 at 23:04 pm
The case is currently in progress. No trial date has been set.
On January 7, 2019, the court certified the class. Plaintiff Monte and the law firms of Strauss & Strauss and Da Vega Fisher Mechtenberg, LLP will represent the class of “All persons employed by Image Distribution Solutions as Account Executives at any location in California at any time since September 20, 2012” with respect to claims 2, 4, and 6 set forth in the following section. If you believe you have any claims against Image Distribution Services (Fontis Solutions) for unpaid overtime, unreimbursed job-related expenses, minimum wages, or unpaid rest periods, such claims will not be resolved in this lawsuit, so you should contact Strauss & Strauss and/or Da Vega Fisher Mechtenberg, LLP as soon as possible to discuss your options.
What is the case about?
Plaintiff Larry Monte (“Plaintiff”) has filed a proposed class action lawsuit against Image Distribution Services (“Fontis Solutions”). Plaintiff seeks to represent all employees who worked for Fontis Solutions as salespersons in California between September 26, 2012 and the present. Plaintiff alleges that he and those similarly-situated employees have not received full and correct pay for all hours worked. The specific claims made are:
- Failure to pay overtime premium wages (Labor Code § 510)
- Unauthorized deductions from wages (Labor Code §§ 221-224)
- Failure to reimburse job-related expenses (Labor Code § 2802)
- Unfair competition (Business and Professions Code § 17200)
- Pay stub violations (Labor Code § 226)
- Failure to timely pay final wages (Labor Code § 203)
- Failure to pay minimum wages (Labor Code §§ 1194, 1197, 1194.2)
- Failure to provide legally compliant rest periods (Labor Code § 226.7)
Fontis denies Plaintiff’s allegations and contends that it fully complied with California law. Fontis also contends that Plaintiff may not bring his lawsuit as a class action or for the benefit of any employees other than himself.
The Court has not yet decided these issues, but the court has certified a class as to claims 2, 4, and 6.
Where is the case pending?
The case is pending in the Ventura County Superior Court as Case No. 56-2016-00486848-CU-OE-VTA. The case is assigned to the Honorable Kevin DeNoce.
Who are the lawyers representing the class?
The class is represented by two law firms: Strauss & Strauss, APC and Da Vega Fisher Mechtenberg, LLP.
Who is in the class?
The court has certified the class. The class is defined as “All persons employed by Image Distribution Solutions as Account Executives at any location in California at any time since September 20, 2012.”
What are the next steps now that the class has been certified?
Now that the class has been certified, the class members must be given notice of class certification. They must also be given the opportunity to exclude themselves from the class, if that’s something they want to do. They will have 30 days to submit their requests to be excluded from the class. The notices have not yet been mailed; we expect them to be mailed within the next month.
I think I am a class member. What should I do?
Please contact Strauss & Strauss directly for more information. Call us at (805) 641-6601.
Key Documents in the Case
Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint
Defendant’s Answer to First Amended Complaint
Minute Order granting Motion for Class Certification