Skip to main content

Tapia v. Frontwave Credit Union

S.D. Cal.August 3, 2021No. 3:20-cv-01950
SettlementFrontwave Credit Union$95,000 awarded
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
Other Statutory Actions
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Unknown
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
consent decree

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wage Theft

Outcome

Class settlement approved for $95,000 in a Fair Credit Reporting Act and California consumer reporting law wage and hour class action. Court granted final approval of settlement, attorneys' fees of $31,666.67, costs of $1,088.74, and class representative incentive payment of $5,000.

What This Ruling Means

**Tapia v. Frontwave Credit Union: Employment Dispute Summary** This case involved an employment dispute between a worker named Tapia and Frontwave Credit Union. While the specific details of what triggered the lawsuit aren't provided in the available information, the case dealt with statutory employment law claims - meaning Tapia alleged the credit union violated laws that protect workers' rights. The court made a decision in this case, but the specific outcome and reasoning aren't detailed in the available records. No monetary damages were reported as part of any settlement or judgment. **What This Means for Workers:** Even without knowing the specific outcome, this case represents the type of employment law disputes that workers can bring against their employers when they believe their statutory rights have been violated. These statutory claims often involve issues like wage and hour violations, discrimination, harassment, or wrongful termination. The case demonstrates that workers have legal options when they face workplace problems that may violate employment laws. Whether successful or not, such cases help establish how employment laws are interpreted and applied in real workplace situations, potentially affecting how similar disputes are handled in the future.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse more:Wage Theft cases

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.