Timothy W. Emery

Recent Class Action Matters

• Abbot v. OpenGov, Inc., No. 24-2-15636-4 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations) (pending final approval);
• Abrego Olea v. Vessel WA Operations, LLC, No. 22-2-06944-9 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for non-compete violations);
• Amundson v. Pub. Util. Dist. No. 2 of Grant Cnty., No. 25-2-00784-13 (Grant Cnty. Super. Ct.);
• Applegate v. Corebridge Fin., Inc., 4:23-cv-03227 (S.D. Tex);
• Atkinson v. AJP Enterprises, LLC, No. 23-2-10313-1 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (seeking payments for two classes for EPOA violations: pay transparency and requesting salary history) (pending final approval);
• Atkinson v. AMF Bowling Centers, Inc., No. 23-2-19816-6 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
• Atkinson v. Burberry Ltd., 23-2-19460-8 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
• Atkinson v. Sonesta International Hotels Corp., No. 23-2-19802-6 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
• Barnes v. Ocuco Inc., No. 8:25-cv-1579 (M.D. Fla.);
• Branson v. Wash. Fine Wine & Spirits, LLC, No. 103394-0, 2025 Wash. LEXIS 442 (Wash. Sept. 4, 2025);
• Brinkman v. Emanuel, Inc., No. 24-2-02186-8 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks and minimum wage violations);
• Burns v. Amazon.com Services LLC, No. 24-2-22574-9 SEA (King Cnty. Super. Ct. Sept. 4, 2025) (order granting plaintiffs’ motion for class certification);
• Carlson v. Pacific Northwest Fondue, LLC, No. 19-2-05401-8 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks);
• Clayton TransUnion, LLC, No. 1:25-cv-11140 (N.D. Ill.);
  
• Clopp v. Pacific Market Research, LLC, No. 21-2-08738-4 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class in a data breach action);
• Cottington v. Washington Traffic Control, LLC, No. 22-2-02152-7 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for minimum wage violations);
• David v. Freedom Vans, LLC, 4 Wn.3d 242 (Wash. 2025) (reversed Trial Court’s ruling restricting the use of non-competition agreements in favor of Washington workers)
• Davis v. Jeff, Pat, Chris LLC, No. 19-2-33832-6 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for minimum wage violations);
• Dozier v. Noble Food Group, Inc., No. 19-2-01148-29 (Skagit Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for minimum wage violations);
• Dykstra v. The Shield Co. Management, Inc., No. 23-2-24015-4 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for wage theft and missed meals and breaks) (pending final approval);
• Eberlein v. Mt. Baker Imaging, No. 25-2-00463-37 (Whatcom Cnty. Super. Ct.);
• Emano Port of Seattle, No. 25-2-11500-3 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.);
• Evans v. Jacobs Solutions, Inc., No. 24-2-14584-2 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for wage theft/failure to payout paid-time-off);
• Fite v. Yakima Valley Radiology, P.C., No. 24-2-00697-39 (Yakima Cnty. Super. Ct.);
• Floyd v. DoorDash, Inc., No. 23-2-19559-1 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
• Garcia v. Wash. Department of Licensing, No. 22-2-05635-5 SEA (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to class in a data breach action);
• Gegax v. Ann / Judith In Home Caregivers of Western Washington, LLC, No. 22-2-17728-4 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for non-compete violations);
• Grove v. Cressy Door Company, Inc., No. 21-2-09828-9 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks and travel time);
• Heard v. Home Express Delivery Service, LLC, No. 20-2-07098-0 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed overtime wages);
• Herold v. Orchard Foods Corp., No. 23-2-19448-9 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations) (pending final approval);
• Honc v. Pacific Pie, Inc., No. 21-2-02653-32 (Spokane Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for minimum wage violations);
• In re Arthur J. Gallagher Data Breach Litig., No. 1:22-cv-00137 (N.D. Ill.) (secured payments to the class in a data breach action)
• In re Clark Cnty. Data Sec. Litig., No. 25-2-022-14-06 (Clark Cnty. Super. Ct.);
• In re Coinbase Customer Data Sec. Breach Litig., MDL No. 3153 (J.P.M.L.);
• In re Fred Hutchinson Cancer Ctr. Data Breach Litig., No. 23-2-24266-1 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.);
• In re Laboratory Serv. Coop. Data Breach Litig., No. 2:25-cv-00685 (W.D. Wash.);
• In re MOVEit Customer Data Sec. Breach Litig., MDL No. 1:23-md-03083 (D. Mass.); 
• In re Snap Fin. Data Breach Litig., No. 2:22-cv-00761 (D. Utah) (secured payments to the class in a data breach action);
• Jens v. Tori Belle Cosmetics, LLC, No. 22-2-06641-5 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (obtained $9,889,985.51 judgment for non-compete violations);
• Jones v. eFinancial, LLC, No. 22-2-19385-9 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for non-compete violations);
• Justice v. Lube Development, L.C., No. 23-2-12593-2 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks and minimum wage violations);
• Kennedy v. Ginsing, LLC, No. 20-2-05287-6 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks);
• Kersey v. Therapeutic Health Serv., No. 24-2-17679-9 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class in a data breach action);
• LaCombe v. USNR, LLC, No. 23-2-03036-2 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for time-clock rounding violations);
• Laughlin v. Cleo Commc’ns US, LLC, No. 1:25-cv-04347 (N.D. Ill.);
• Margul Evolve Bank & Trust, No. 1:24-cv-03259 (D. Colo.);
• McAuley v. Pierce College Dist., No. 23-2-11064-7 (Pierce Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class in a data breach action);
• Moliga v. Ambrosia QSR Burger, LLC, No. 24-2-13001-2 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations) (pending final approval);
• Moliga v. Ginsing, LLC, No. 23-2-13231-5 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
• Moliga v. Marriott International, Inc., No. 23-2-19493-4 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
• Moliga v. Qdoba Restaurant Corp., No. 23-2-11540-6 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
• Moliga v. Vessel WA Operations, LLC, No. 21-2-09027-0 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks);
• Morey v. Aftermath Services, LLC, No. 2:21-cv-00885 (W.D. Wash.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks and minimum wage violations);
• Morey v. Suburban Propane, L.P., No. 23-2-19553-1 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations) (pending final approval);
• Morrill v. Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC, No. 1:2022-cv-20955 (S.D. Fla.);
• Morrow v. Maverick Washington, LLC, No.  22-2-03653-2 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks and minimum wage violations);
• Nunley v. Chelan-Douglas Health Dist., No 39571-5-III, 2024 Wash. App. LEXIS 2196 (Wash. Ct. App. Oct. 31, 2024) (secured payments to the class in a data breach action);
• Nyannor v. Vessel WA Operations, LLC, No. 22-2-08233-0 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for violations of the Seattle Secure Scheduling Ordinance);
• Owusu v. Renton Sch. Dist., No. 24-2-10635-3 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.);
• Perkins v. Proliance Surgeons, Inc., P.S., No. 23-2-23579-7 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.);
• Perry v. AWP, Inc., No. 24-2-12752-6 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations) (pending final approval);
• Robes Solis ex rel. v. Highline Sch. Dist. No. 401, No. 25-2-11395-7 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.);
• Saraceno-Oliveri v. Solgen Power, LLC, No. 23-2-09228-7 King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for non-compete violations);
• Schneider v. Assurance IQ, LLC, No. 22-2-15633-3 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for non-compete violations);
• Shipman v. Airport Investment Company, Inc., No. 19-2-32386-8 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for minimum wage violations);
• Smith United Backcare, P.S., No. 25-2-07491-9 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.);
• Spencer v. City of Mount Vernon, No. 22-2-00461-29 (Skagit Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violation);
• Spencer v. Conifer Revenue Cycle Solutions, LLC, No. 23-2-19345-8 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
• Spencer v. JELD-WEN, Inc., No. 23-2-19581-7 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations) (pending final approval);
• Spencer v. Mastercard International, Inc., No. 23-2-19564-7 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
• Spencer v. Providence St. Joseph Health Foundation, No. 24-28211-4 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations) (pending final approval);
• Taylor v. RACOM Corp., No. 24-2-08410-0 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for non-compete violations) (pending final approval);
• Viveros v. Perfect Blend, LLC, No. 23-2-05511-0 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to two classes for EPOA and MWA violations);
• Voivod v. APIZZA, LLC, No. 23-2-06729-1 (King Cnty. Super Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks);
• Warren v. Discount Tire Co. of Washington, Inc., No. 22-2-10618-8 (Pierce Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks and minimum wage violations);
• Yount v. Cintas Corp., No. 23-2-19408-0 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
• Yount v. Diamond Parking, Inc., No. 23-2-19309-1 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
• Yount v. Northwest Restaurants, Inc., No. 23-2-19399-7 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
• Yount v. Sharp Elec. Corp., No. 23-2-19425-0 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations); and
• Yount v. Williams Sonoma, No. 24-2-06599-7 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations).

Recent Individual Representations

• Confidential six-figure resolution for wrongful termination
• $225,000 for sexual harassment pretrial resolution
• $79,500 for unpaid overtime
• $965,000 confidential resolution for race discrimination and wage withholding
• $825,000 confidential resolution for employment law violations
• $1.5MM confidential resolution for gender discrimination
• $250,000 for hostile work environment
• $550,000 settlement (settled on individual basis) for withheld pay from several dozen hourly workers
• $517,000 for wrongful termination and age discrimination
• $150,000 plus an additional estimated $300,000 in equity for wrongful termination and breach of contract
• Multiple resolutions for Washington Amazon employees
• Six-figure confidential resolution for wrongfully terminated med-tech sales worker
• Six-figure confidential resolution for worker’s sexual harassment claim
• Six-figure confidential settlement for discrimination claim

Recent Press

• Law360: Home Depot Accused of Helping Police Spy on Customers
• MyNorthwest: Two Employees Take Aim at Amazon’s Non-Compete Compliance
• Seattle Times: Redfin Failed to Disclose Pay In Job Ads, Lawsuit Claims
• Law360: Nintendo Customers Jump In On Tariff Refund Suits
• Law360: Whitepages Can’t Nix Colo. Telemarketing Fraud Class Claims
• King5: Costco Sued Over Claims it Raised Prices, then Sought Tariff Refunds from Government
• Law360: Chipotle Worker In Seattle Alleges Scheduling Law Violations

• Seattle Times: Costco Sued Over Trump Tariff Refunds

• Law360: Ex-Manager Says Zipcar Used Illegal Noncompetes, Pay Rules

• Seattle Times: Seattle employers gird for ‘Super Sick Monday’

• Law360: Apple Workers In Wash. Sue Over Limits On Moonlighting

• Lexology.com: Lawsuits Over Second Jobs and Wage Transparency Surge

• Law360: Office Depot Spars Over Class Cert. In Wash. Pay Scale Suit

• Law360: Delta Fights to Keep Pay Range Suit In Federal Court

• KIRO7: Ste. Michelle Wine Estates accused of widespread wage violations in new class-action suit

• Seattle Times: Workers Sue WA’s Biggest Employers Over Limits on Taking a Second Job
• The Spokesman Review: Workers Sue WA’s Biggest Employers Over Limits on Taking a Second Job
• Law360: Ulta Beauty’s Guidance Doesn’t Prevent 2nd Jobs, Co. Says
• Law360: Delta Air Lines Applicant Says Pay Range Suit Not Fed. Matter
• Cascade PBS: WA Law Restricts Noncompete Agreements. They Keep Popping Up Anyway
• Law360: TikTok Urges Nix Of Wash. Applicant’s Pay Transparency Suit
• Law360: Walmart Pay Transparency Suit Returns To Wash. State Court
• Law.com: Anti-Moonlighting, Wage Transparency Suits Proliferate
• Seattle Times: WA’s Law Requiring Pay Rates On Job Ads Is Changing. No One Is Happy
• Law360.com: AMG Must Face $85M Fintech Collapse Suit, Customers Say
• Law360.com: Fred Meyer Faces $81M Suit Over Anti-Moonlighting Policy
• Law360.com: Disney Sees Another Class Claim Over Child Privacy Practices
• The Olympian: Can I Be Fired for Making a Political Post on Facebook? What Washington Law Says

• The News Tribune: Can I Be Fired for Making a Political Post on Facebook? What Washington Law Says
• Law360.com: Wash. Pay Transparency Ruling Leaves Many Open Questions
• Puget Sound Business Journal: Washington Pay Transparency Law Heads Back to Federal Court
• Law360: Wash. Justices Endorse Broad View Of Pay Transparency Law
• Law360: Home Depot Faces Suit Over Worker Moonlighting Ban
• Law360: American Airlines Pushed Assault Victim Out, Suit Says
• The Columbian: Residents File Class-Action Lawsuits Against Clark County Over 2023 Data Breach
• Law360: Lineage Bank Denies Duty In $85M Fintech Collapse Suit
• Law360: ZoomInfo Accused Of Illegally Selling Cellphone Numbers
• The News Tribune: Cyberattack Exposed 155K People’s Data at a Pierce County College. District to Pay $1.2M
• Seattle Times: Pay Transparency: ‘Stop Breaking the Law’
• The Stranger: New State Legislation Kills Pay Transparency
• Seattle Times: WA Pay Transparency Lawsuits Spark ‘Cottage Industry’ Claims
• Law360.com: Wash. Justices Wary Of Pay Transparency Law Stances
• Law360.com: 3 Firms Seek To Co-Lead Suits Over Banks’ Synapse Ties
• Law360.com: Mercedes-Benz Defective Brake Suit Narrowed Again
• Law360.com: Wash. Justices Back Workers’ View On Moonlighting Law
• Law360.com: Customers Sue Fintech Partner Banks After Processor Failure
• Law360.com: Delta Pay Range Suit to Wait for Wash. Justices’ Clarity
• Law360.com: HP Applicant Gets Pay Posting Suit Sent Back to State Court
• GeekWire: New Class Action Lawsuits Target Amazon Over Non-competes and Pay Transparency
• Seattle Times: Amazon Accused of Violating WA’s Ban on Noncompete Agreements
• Law360.com: Siemens Accused of Violating Wash. Pay Transparency Law
• Law360.com: T-Mobile Doesn’t Pay Technicians Proper OT, Suit Says
  
• Law360.com: Retailer Says No Good Faith In Worker’s Wash. Pay Range Suit
  
• Law360.com: Taco Bell Franchisee Will Pay $2M to End Job-Posting Suits
  
• Law360.com: HP Moves Washington Pay Transparency Suit to US Court
• Law360.com: Job Hopeful’s Lack of Injury Sinks Wash. Pay Disclosure Suit
• Law360.com: Appeal of Wash. Pay Range Suit Remand Gets Shut Down
• Law360.com: Wash. Job Applicant’s Pay Transparency Suit Tossed for Now
• Law360.com: Staffing Agency Escapes Applicant’s Salary Disclosure Suit
• Law360.com: Wash. Pay Range Suits Meet Early Crossroads on Standing
• Law360.com: Wash. Solar Co. Will Pay $465K To End Noncompete Suit
• Law360.com: Parking Co. Strikes $1.4M Deal To End Pay Transparency Suit
• JD Supra: Emery Reddy Files 31 Pay Transparency Lawsuits in Washington
• Law.com: Companies Hit with Class Actions Over Alleged Violations of Equal Pay Act
• Law360.com: Spate of Pay Range Suits Has Wash. Employers ‘Freaking Out’
• Tacoma News Tribune: Virginia Mason Franciscan Health Sued for Patient Data Breach
• Seattle Times: Barrage of Lawsuits Against Fred Hutch Arrives After Recent Data Leak
• Fox 13: Minimum Wage, Cannabis Use, Waiting Period for Guns: New Laws Going into Effect in Washington in 2024
• Bloomberg.com: Adidas, Home Depot Sued in Test Cases on Job Ad Pay Transparency
• The News Tribune: Pierce College cyberattack exposed 155,000 people’s data. Is the district at fault?
• GovernmentTecnology.com: Pierce College Sued in Wake of Cyber Attack
• CNBC.com: Some Companies Lower Salaries in Job Postings as Pay Transparency Laws Take Effect, New Report Finds
• Seattle Times: Emery | Reddy, PC Files 31 Lawsuits for EPOA Violations Since June
• Seattle Times: Employee Suit Claims Seattle Melting Pot Owner Pocketed Minimum Wage Surcharge and Shortchanged Workers
• DailyBeast.com: How Amazon Stacks the Deck Against Workers Fighting to Keep Their Jobs
• Seattle Times: So Far, Washington Workers Pushed Out Over Vaccine Mandates Aren’t Losing Jobless Benefits
• ADN.com: Some City of Seattle Workers are Ready to Quit Rather than Return to the Office
• Seattle Times: Some City of Seattle Workers Ready to Quit Rather than Return to Office
• Everett Community College: EvCC Pays $150,000 to Settle Terminated Employee’s Lawsuit
• KIRO7: Could Employers Require Workers to Get the COVID-19 Vaccine?
• Heraldnet.com: After Cop’s Suicide, Everett Picked ‘Money Over the People,’ Family Says