Amy E. Beverlin

She | Her | Hers

Associate

Los Angeles
T +1.310.979.8466
F +1.310.820.8859

Overview

Amy Beverlin is a highly experienced employment attorney who works closely and proactively with employers to develop and implement creative and pragmatic ways to prevent, litigate and resolve employment-related and other business disputes and issues.

Amy represents employers in all aspects of employment-related litigation, including wage and hour class and collective actions, California Labor Code Private Attorney General Act (PAGA) representative actions, discrimination, retaliation and wrongful termination claims, and misappropriation of trade secrets and non-competition agreement claims. She routinely advises employers on a wide range of employment matters, including wage and hour compliance, leave administration and state and federal WARN compliance.

Amy previously served as a judicial law clerk on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and as a judicial extern on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and on the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Drawing on this prior experience, she is passionate about producing exceptional work product for clients that best positions their arguments before state and federal trial and appellate courts.

Amy has significant experience representing clients in the food and beverage, manufacturing, retail, transportation and third-party logistics and distribution industries. Her practice is national in scope, representing clients in courts throughout the United States, including in California, Maryland, Mississippi, Washington and Wisconsin.

Select Experience

  • Defending national third-party logistics and warehousing service provider against claims brought by former Chief Executive Officer for alleged breach of employment agreements, unpaid wages and challenges of restrictive covenants.
  • Obtained an order denying class certification on a motion for reconsideration in two related wage and hour class actions for a leading financial institution, one involving financial center employees and the other involving call center employees, based on findings that there was no evidence of any de facto policies necessitating off-the-clock work or impeding the taking of meal and rest breaks, and that individual issues predominated. The court also denied the plaintiffs’ request for leave to file an amended, consolidated complaint to try to cure their class certification infirmities. Frausto v. Bank of America, N.A., 2021 WL 2476902 (N.D. Cal. June 17, 2021).
  • Obtained an order dismissing with prejudice at the pleading stage California state law claims for inaccurate wage statements, waiting time penalties and shared labor contractor liability in a proposed class action against a national third-party logistics client. Parsittie v. Schneider Logistics, Inc. et al., 2020 WL 212003 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2020), aff’d in part, rev’d in part and remanded --- F. App’x ---, 2021 WL 2365978 (9th Cir. 2021).
More »

Experience

  • Defending national third-party logistics and warehousing service provider against claims brought by former Chief Executive Officer for alleged breach of employment agreements, unpaid wages and challenges of restrictive covenants.
  • Obtained an order denying class certification on a motion for reconsideration in two related wage and hour class actions for a leading financial institution, one involving financial center employees and the other involving call center employees, based on findings that there was no evidence of any de facto policies necessitating off-the-clock work or impeding the taking of meal and rest breaks, and that individual issues predominated. The court also denied the plaintiffs’ request for leave to file an amended, consolidated complaint to try to cure their class certification infirmities. Frausto v. Bank of America, N.A., 2021 WL 2476902 (N.D. Cal. June 17, 2021).
  • Obtained an order dismissing with prejudice at the pleading stage California state law claims for inaccurate wage statements, waiting time penalties and shared labor contractor liability in a proposed class action against a national third-party logistics client. Parsittie v. Schneider Logistics, Inc. et al., 2020 WL 212003 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2020), aff’d in part, rev’d in part and remanded --- F. App’x ---, 2021 WL 2365978 (9th Cir. 2021).
  • Obtained dismissal with prejudice at the pleading stage of a proposed nationwide FLSA collective action and Rule 23 Wisconsin state law and federal Truth in Leasing Act class action based on alleged misclassification of owner-operator truck drivers used by national motor carrier, finding as a matter of law that the plaintiff and proposed collective and class members were properly classified as independent contractors. Brant v. Schneider National, Inc. et al., E.D. Wisc. Case No. 1:20-cv-01049-WCG, Dkt. #83 (May 20, 2021).
  • Successfully defeated motion to remand putative class action in action alleging claims for violation of various provisions of the California Labor Code, after which action was compelled to individual arbitration. Vasquez v. RSI Home Products, Inc., 2020 WL 6778772 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 12, 2020).
  • Successfully compelled to individual arbitration a proposed Rule 23 Cal-WARN and nationwide WARN class action brought against a transportation industry client pursuant to the Nevada choice of law provision in the arbitration policy because, as a truck driver, the named plaintiff was found to be outside the coverage of the Federal Arbitration Act. Romero v. Watkins and Shepard Trucking, Inc. et al., 2020 WL 5775180 (C.D. Cal. July 10, 2020), aff’d --- F. App’x ---, 2021 WL 3675074 (9th Cir. Aug. 19, 2021).
  • Successfully moved to compel individual arbitration of a proposed Rule 23 wage and hour class action against a building products manufacturer alleging meal and rest period, inaccurate wage statement and final pay violations. Bishop v. Boral Industries, Inc. et al., 2020 WL 4530740 (S.D. Cal. Aug. 6, 2020).
  • Successfully compelled to individual arbitrations the claims of approximately 100 named and opt-in plaintiffs who alleged they were misclassified as overtime exempt by a retailer in a proposed nationwide FLSA collective action filed in the Southern District of Mississippi. Kidd et al. v. Lowe’s Home Centers, LLC et al., 2020 WL 1493464 (S.D. Miss. March 27, 2020), 2020 WL 9258481 (S.D. Miss. Dec. 2, 2020).
  • Successfully moved for judgment on the pleadings on the grounds that that judicial estoppel barred the plaintiff from bringing her state law discrimination claims against the defendant because she failed to list them in her intervening bankruptcy petition and did not amend her disclosure statements or schedules during the pendency of the bankruptcy proceedings. Mamlouk v. Schneider Logistics Transloading & Distribution, Inc., 2020 WL 1244365 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 16, 2020).
  • Obtained an order dismissing with prejudice at the pleading stage a proposed Rule 23 class action alleging claims for minimum wage, overtime pay, meal and rest period, inaccurate wage statement, final pay and unreimbursed business expenses violations. Sherman v. Schneider National Carriers, Inc., et al., 2019 WL 8160687 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 5, 2019).
  • Successfully moved to compel individual arbitration of a proposed Rule 23 wage and hour class action, after twice moving to dismiss plaintiff’s complaints and obtaining dismissal of plaintiff’s meal and rest break and wage statement claims with prejudice, with the court rejecting the plaintiff’s contention that such litigation conduct constituted a waiver of the employer’s right to compel arbitration. Guerrero v. Haliburton Energy Services, Inc., 2018 WL 3615840 (E.D. Cal. July 26, 2018).
  • Successfully moved to dismiss on forum non conveniens grounds, based on a Wisconsin forum selection provision, a putative Rule 23 class action brought against a national motor carrier for California state law wage and hour claims based on alleged independent contractor misclassification of truck drivers, and ultimately obtained ruling in Wisconsin state court enforcing the Wisconsin choice of law provision that effectively mooted all of the plaintiff’s claims. Robles v. Schneider National Carriers, Inc. et al., 2017 WL 8232083 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 11, 2017).
  • Successfully moved to dismiss with prejudice for lack of personal jurisdiction wrongful termination and fraudulent inducement action brought by a U.S. national employed in Singapore by international maritime port terminal operator. Gordon v. APM Terminals North America, Inc., 2017 WL 3838092 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 1, 2017).

Recognitions and Memberships

Pro Bono

  • Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund

Prior Positions

  • The Honorable Charles R. Wilson, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit: Judicial Law Clerk (2014 to 2015)
  • The Honorable Alex Kozinski, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit: Judicial Extern (January to May 2011)
  • The Honorable Dean D. Pregerson, U.S. District Court, Central District of California: Judicial Extern (May to July 2011)

Admissions

  • U.S. District Court, Central District of California
  • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California
  • U.S. District Court, Northern District of California
  • U.S. District Court, Southern District of California
  • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
  • California

Education

  • J.D., Southwestern University School of Law, 2012, magna cum laude; Executive Board - Notes and Comments Editor, Southwestern Law Review
  • B.A., Scripps College, 2007; Academic All-American