"Top Plaintiff Lawyers 2022," Daily Journal (Jun. 6, 2022) ("Plaintiffs’ lawyer, poet, blogger and animal shelter volunteer Kimberly Kralowec’s interests are as varied as the class action matters she handles as founder and principal of her own practice.")
"Split 9th Circ. Nixes Settlement in Tinder Age Bias Suit," Law360 (Aug. 18, 2021)
"How These Attorneys Turned Up the Heat on Apple in Wage Fight," Law360 Pulse (April 23, 2021) ("'[The appeal] was actually really interesting,' [lead appellate counsel Kimberly Kralowec] said. 'From an intellectual standpoint, it was the kind of project that appellate lawyers often enjoy.' .... '[The compensability issue] was very thoroughly briefed by the end,' Kralowec said.")
"Alsup Says Apple Owes Calif. Workers for Bag Check Time," Employment Law360 (Mar. 3, 2021) ("Judge Alsup says he plans to enter partial judgment in favor of the class that says 'at all material times' Apple was liable for compensating class members for waiting in lines and having their bags checked.")
"Ninth Circuit Resuscitates Apple Store Employee Bag Search Class Action," The Recorder (Sept. 2, 2020) ("Kimberly Kralowec ... said that the team was pleased with the ruling and looks forward to resuming the litigation before the district court.")
"Apple Must Pay Workers for Time Undergoing Exit Searches," Bloomberg Law (Sept. 2, 2020) ("The workers are pleased with the decision, which vindicates their right to be paid for the time Apple controlled them, said their attorney, Kimberly Kralowec.")
"Top Labor & Employment Lawyers 2020," Daily Journal (Jul. 15, 2020) (Kralowec "served as lead appellate counsel for the employees in one of the most significant wage and hour outcomes of 2020 so far in which the state Supreme Court held that workers are entitled to be paid for undergoing mandatory security searches of their bags and tech devices.")
"Workers must be paid for time of bag searches, high court rules," Daily Journal (Feb. 14, 2020) ("In a closely watched labor decision, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday that employers must pay employees for time spent waiting for and undergoing required searches of bags, electronics and other personal belongings brought to the workplace. .... Kimberly A. Kralowec, who represents a class of potentially more than 12,000 Apple employees, said the court 'closely adhered to the text of the wage orders.'")
"High Court Orders Apple to Pay Workers for Time Spent Searching Their Bags," The Recorder (Feb. 13, 2020) ("Plaintiffs' attorney, Kimberly Kralowec of San Francisco's Kralowec Law, P.C., praised the decision. 'The court carefully adhered to both the text and the purpose of the wage orders, which is to protect California employees and ensure employees are compensated for all time worked,' she said. 'This is a very good day for employees working in California.'")
"In Apple suit, California high court says workers must be paid for time they’re searched," San Francisco Chronicle (Feb. 13, 2020) ("'It’s a good day for employees in California,' Kralowec said. She said the ruling would allow Apple employees to seek damages for unpaid search time dating back to July 2009, four years before the suit was filed.")
"Apple on Hook for Millions for Off-the-Clock Bag Searches," Bloomberg Law (Feb. 13, 2020) (after Apple decision, "'more employers would be likely to compensate their employees for security search time, as the law requires,' Kralowec said.")
"Apple on Hook for Millions for Off-Clock Employee Searches," Courthouse News Service (Feb. 13, 2020) ("Class attorney Kimberly Kralowec said Thursday’s opinion 'carefully adhered to the text and purpose of the wage orders' and that the control test was meant to ensure employees can be compensated for more of their time, not less.")
"State high court hears arguments on Apple Store employee bag checks," Daily Journal (Dec. 5, 2019) ("Kimberly A. Kralowec of Kralowec Law PC in San Francisco said the time is compensable under Wage Order 7 ... [and] stood pat as justices peppered her with hypotheticals meant to undermine that interpretation.")
"Apple's Denying Pay to Workers for Bag Search Questioned," Bloomberg Law (Dec. 4, 2019) ("The key is employer control ..., said Kimberly Kralowec .... 'There are other ways to deal with the potential issue of retail theft than to burden the employees,' Kralowec said.)
"Calif. Justices Weigh Wages For Bag Checks In Apple Case," Employment Law360 (Dec. 4, 2019) ("Kimberly Kralowec ... argued the time is compensable because the workers are under the control of the employer and Apple has a written policy that says workers who don't agree to checks are subject to disciplinary actions and could be fired.")
"Arbitration Pacts Get Supreme Boost Over Contract Law," Bloomberg Law (Apr. 25, 2019) ("'This ruling could give federal judges license to disregard any state contract law [principles],' said Kimberly Kralowec, a California-based plaintiffs’ attorney.")
"9th Circ. Saves OnStar Consumer's Suit From Arbitration," Appellate Law360 (Mar. 16, 2018) ("A federal appeals court resuscitated a potential class action against General Motors unit OnStar LLC on Thursday, saying the case couldn’t be sent to arbitration .... Kimberly Kralowec, a lawyer for Robinson and the proposed class, said Norcia was one of her team’s primary legal authorities.")
"Tinder lawyers ask state high court to back age-based pricing," Daily Journal (Mar. 15, 2018) ("'There are reasons why discounts for seniors are lawful and those reasons just don't exist for the adult, under-30 group ...,' class attorney Kimberly Kralowec of Kralowec Law commented on Wednesday.")
"Appeals court swipes right for Tinder class action," Daily Journal (Jan. 31, 2018) ("'The Court of Appeal was very careful to adhere to California Supreme Court precedent on the Unruh Act,' Kralowec said.")
"Tinder can't charge older users more for premium services, California court rules," NBC News (Jan. 31, 2018) ("Tinder can no longer charge higher rates to users aged 30 and over after a California court ruled on Monday that the practice was a form of age-based discrimination. .... Al Rava, who represented the plaintiff along with co-counsel Kim Kralowec, noted that the decision was a significant one ....")
"Court of Appeal Reignites Age Discrimination Suit Against Tinder," The Recorder (Jan. 30, 2018) ("The decision is a win for ... [appellate counsel] Kimberly Kralowec of The Kralowec Law Group in San Francisco.")
"California Won't Join Federal Courts on Objector Appeals," Bloomberg Law (Jan. 29, 2018) (California Supreme Court's Hernandez opinion "will preserve 'the ability of those with legitimate objections to raise them and if necessary, to appeal,' plaintiffs’ attorney Kimberly A. Kralowec in San Francisco told Bloomberg Law. Kralowec, who wasn’t involved in the case, blogs about California consumer law at http://www.uclpractitioner.com/.")
"Tinder User Says Age Bias Suit Deserves Second Chance," Consumer Protection Law360 (Jan. 10, 2018) ("'Let’s say younger people do tend to earn less money,' said Kimberly A. Kralowec of The Kralowec Law Group. 'The question is, is that a societal ill we need to remedy with an exemption to the Unruh Act?'")
"California Cases To Watch In 2018," California Law360 (Jan. 1, 2018) ("California attorneys in 2018 will be closely watching [four] big-ticket cases in the employment and intellectual property areas, including ... an Apple case that will test whether employees must be compensated for time spent in bag checks. .... The employees are represented by Kimberly A. Kralowec of the Kralowec Law Group.")
"9th Circuit Asks California Court for View on Apple Bag Checks," Employment Law360 (Aug. 17, 2017) ("The employees are represented by Kimberly A. Kralowec of the Kralowec Law Group.")
"9th Circuit sends bag search wait time claim to state Supreme Court," Daily Journal (Aug. 17, 2017) ("Apple employees are also required to submit devices like cellphones for review, according to the plaintiffs’ attorney, Kimberly A. Kralowec. The company does not pay its employees for this time.")
"Ninth Circuit Routes Apple Store Worker Suit Over Security Screening Pay to State Supreme Court," The Recorder (Aug. 16, 2017) ("Kimberly Kralowec of The Kralowec Law Group, who represents the plaintiffs in the Apple case, pointed out the Ninth Circuit listed 10 recent cases that have raised issues about how the governing state law—the California Wage Orders—apply to a variety of employment security checks. 'It would be very helpful for the Supreme Court to provide further guidance on this issue,' said Kralowec, who had urged the Ninth Circuit to route the question to California's high court.")
"9th Circ. May Steer Apple Bag Check Row To Calif. Justices," Employment Law360 (Jul. 12, 2017) ("Kimberly A. Kralowec of the Kralowec Law Group, who represented the workers, [argued that] Judge Alsup erred when he ruled that although Apple employees are under the control of management during the mandatory bag checks, the checks are not 'required' since employees could leave their bags and phones at home. .... If the panel sends the question to the California Supreme Court, the state high court should decide if it makes a difference under the state labor statute whether a required job activity is triggered by a voluntary choice workers make before the activity, Kralowec said.")
"Trump blasts Nordstrom for dropping Ivanka's clothing Line," Politico (Feb. 8, 2017) ("Kimberly Kralowec, a California attorney who runs a blog about the California Unfair Competition Law, said it would be a stretch to sue Trump under the [UCL]. The law is designed to protect consumers and business competitors from unfair treatment.")
"High court rules workers cannot be bothered during rest breaks," Daily Journal (Dec. 23, 2016) ("'Today is a banner day for employee protection in California,' said Kimberly A. Kralowec, a plaintiffs' employment lawyer at the Kralowec Law Group who argued Brinker before the Supreme Court in 2012. .... 'The court beautifully adhered to Brinker and confirmed that rest breaks, like meal periods, must be wholly duty-free,' Kralowec said.")
"Farmers Insurees’ Attys Get $8.5M Fees For 'Short Rate' Win," Class Action Law360 (Oct. 28, 2016)
"Dole Buyers Get Mixed Win in 9th Circ. Natural Label Ruling," Competition Law360 (Oct. 4, 2016) ("'I think this opinion mistakenly assumes that there are only two limited ways to measure [UCL] restitution, which is not the law in California,' said Kimberly A. Kralowec of The Kralowec Law Group.")
"Apple Misinterprets 'Work' in Screening Suit, Workers Say," Employment Law360 (Jun. 28, 2016)
"Apple digs in heels over bag check spat," Daily Journal (Oct. 22, 2015) ("[I]n their own summary judgment motion, plaintiff lawyers Lee S. Shalov and Kimberly A. Kralowec note 'Apple controls all aspects of the checks' and conduct inspections purely for their own benefit of ensuring workers do not steal.")
"Judge OKs Class of Apple Store Workers in Bag-Check Suit," The Recorder (July 16, 2015) ("U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California on Thursday certified a class of Apple Inc. retail employees in California in a suit over the company's bag-search policy. Plaintiffs lawyers at McLaughlin & Stern and The Kralowec Law Group are seeking compensation for time employees spent in security checks that Apple put in place ....")
"Brinker announces $56.5 million settlement of meal and rest claims," Daily Journal (Aug. 8, 2014) ("After 10 years of litigation, a group of restaurant workers has agreed to settle a wage and hour class action against the parent company of Chili's for about $56 million, a move that employment attorneys said will open the door further to lawsuits based on claims that workers were deprived of meal and rest breaks. .... A handful of prominent plaintiffs' attorneys from around the state also participated in the case, including Kimberly A. Kralowec of the Kralowec Law Group in San Francisco.")
"Breyer Sticks Named Plaintiff With HP's Legal Bill in Employment Suit" The Recorder (July 28, 2014) ("It's rare a judge will order an employee to pay attorney fees in employment suits. Few statutes even allow for that type of fee shifting, according to San Francisco employment attorney Kimberly Kralowec. The ones that do generally specify the employee only has to pay if he or she acted in bad faith. 'The purpose of that,' Kralowec said, 'is to avoid discouraging plaintiffs from going into court to pursue their rights.'")
"Rogue Filing in 'No Poach' Case Under Investigation," The Recorder (July 8, 2014) ("'I have never seen anything like this in my 20-plus years of practice,' employment attorney Kimberly Kralowec with Kralowec Law said in an email.").
"Justices Strike Overtime Award Based on Flawed Statistics," The Recorder (May 30, 2014) ("Kimberly Kralowec, who filed an amicus brief in the case on behalf of the California Employment Lawyers Association, said the court shot down U.S. Bank's claim that it should have a right to call every class member individually to the stand. 'Essentially they were arguing you never get to have a class action,' she said.")
"Class actions are still thriving after Brinker," Daily Journal (May 8, 2014) ("[P]laintiffs' attorneys such as Kimberly Kralowec of The Kralowec Law Group say the pendulum of appellate decisions has swung in their clients' direction.")
"Bank Overtime Appeal Sets Stage for Post-Dukes Clash," The Recorder (Feb. 21, 2014) (sampling and statistical methods "are reasonable, time-tested tools for managing sprawling class litigation, argues Kimberly Kralowec for the California Employment Lawyers Association ....")
"Brinker: Then and Now," Forum (Sept./Oct. 2013) ("The plaintiffs in Brinker were ably represented by a 'Who's Who' of the best legal minds in employment and class action law.")
"9th Circuit okays class action for wage and hour violations," Daily Journal (Sept. 30, 2013) ("Plaintiffs' class action attorney Kimberly A. Kralowec, who was not involved in the case, said the 9th Circuit's decision bodes well for future wage and hour lawsuits in federal court. 'Wage and hour class actions are alive and well,' Kralowec said. 'Now we have a 9th Circuit decision addressing whether employers can require on-duty meal periods.'")
"Top Labor & Employment Lawyers," Daily Journal (July 17, 2013)
"Circuit's reversal in wage case complicates Comcast," Daily Journal (May 29, 2013) ("'[T]he opinion debunks a myth that developed, already, around Comcast, which is this notion that individual damage questions can defeat class certification,' said Kimberly A. Kralowec, a plaintiffs' attorney at the Kralowec Law Group in San Francisco. 'The U.S. Supreme Court did not in fact change anything about the law regarding individual damage questions.'")
"Court deals setback to Wal-Mart contractor in employment litigation," Daily Journal (March 29, 2013) ("Kimberly A. Kralowec ... said courts don't make rulings limiting communication with opposing parties lightly. 'That sort of order is not something that would be issued unless the court found that there was a real risk of abuse ...,' she said.")
"2013 California Lawyer Attorneys of the Year," California Lawyer (March 2013) ("Lauded by both plaintiff and defense employment bars, the California Supreme Court's unanimous April decision in Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court (53 Cal. 4th 1004 (2012)) resolved years of uncertainty by setting out definitive guidance on the often-litigated issue of the amount and timing of meal and rest periods for nonexempt employees. Kralowec ... argued for the plaintiffs before the high court.")
"Depublication of employment appellate rulings stirs curiosity," Daily Journal (January 30, 2013) ("Kimberly A. Kralowec of the Kralowec Law Group filed a depublication request for each of the three cases in question .... She asserts the decisions misstated the Supreme Court's analysis in Brinker ....")
"High Court Queues Up Number of Post-Brinker Cases," The Recorder (January 7, 2013) ("Kimberly Kralowec of The Kralowec Law Group said in both rulings the Second District had 'misinterpreted the Brinker decision, in particular what employers have to do to comply with their meal period obligations.' Depublishing, she said, 'was a very strong signal that the court disagreed with the analysis' in those two cases.")
"Suit Over Farmers 'Short Rate' Policy Revived," Insurance Law360 (December 21, 2012) ("Kimberly Kralowec of The Kralowec Law Group, who represents the plaintiffs, told Law360 on Friday that she and her team were very happy with the ruling. 'We think that it shows that insurers cannot use technical language buried in the fine print of an insurance contract without disclosing what that language means to its policyholders,' Kralowec said.")
"Top Labor & Employment Lawyers," Daily Journal (July 16, 2012)
"Top Women Lawyers," Daily Journal (May 9, 2012)
"Employer liability for rest breaks clarified by high court," Daily Journal, April 13, 2012
"Employment bar anticipates Brinker decision," Daily Journal, April 9, 2012 ("'I think the class certification issues are pretty straight forward and that the trial judge's certification order was well supported by California law,' said Kimberly Kralowec of The Kralowec Law Group in San Francisco, one of the attorneys who represented the restaurant workers before the Supreme Court.")
"Class Dismissed," California Lawyer, April 2012 ("Others in the plaintiffs bar contend the panel's decision [in Mazza v. American Honda] is just wrong-headed. 'I think that the decision misapplies California choice of law rules and misapplies the UCL,' says Kimberly A. Kralowec, a specialist in UCL litigation for the Kralowec Law Group in San Francisco.")
"State supreme court takes up class-action waivers in the post-Concepcion era," Daily Journal, March 23, 2012 ("'It's good that we will be getting relatively early word from the [state] Supreme Court on what Concepcion means,' said Kimberly Kralowec of the Kralowec Law Group, an expert in consumer class actions.")
"Brief: Brinker ruling should apply to past, future cases," Daily Journal, January 5, 2012 ("Plaintiffs' lawyer Kimberly A. Kralowec said [a prospective-only] ruling would not be acceptable.")
"Workers Urge Retroactive Ruling In Brinker Meal Break Case," Employment Law360, January 5, 2012 ("The plaintiffs are represented by Michael Rubin of Altshuler Berzon LLP, Kimberly Kralowec of the Kralowec Law Group, Timothy Cohelan and Michael Singer of Cohelan Khoury & Singer, L. Tracee Lorens and Wayne Hughes of Lorens & Associates PLC and William Turley of the Turley Law Firm PLC.")
"Employment Cases to Watch in 2012," Employment Law360 (January 2, 2012)
"Attorney hopes high court takes up case against AIG," Daily Journal, December 20, 2011 ("A San Francisco plaintiffs' attorney who specializes in Unfair Competition Law cases agreed ... that the court misapplied Kwikset. 'The complaint alleged that the plaintiffs' annuities lost value as a direct result of AIG's misconduct, which led to its near-collapse,' said Kimberly Kralowec of the Kralowec Law Group. 'That should be enough to satisfy the UCL's standing requirement as interpreted in Kwikset.'")
"Calif. Top Court Asked to Mull 'Rolling 5' in Brinker Case," Employment Law360 (December 6, 2011) ("Kimberly Kralowec, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said that ... [u]nder the defendants' take on the law, '[employers] could require people to take lunch at nine in the morning and then work for nine hours.'")
"Brinker at the Supreme Court," The Recorder, November 15, 2011 ("Kimberly Kralowec, representing the real party in interest workers, said that the provisions could be harmonized, but if the court were to conclude otherwise, the wage order could provide greater protections to employees than the statute.")
"The end of an era: Meal break case finally heard by state Supreme Court," Daily Journal, November 10, 2011 ("I half expected to see plaintiffs' lawyers dressed up in a Yoda costume with a placard declaring 'Use the Force Kim,' (Kim Kralowec, lawyer for the employees) ....")
"Justices skeptical of mandatory meal breaks," Daily Journal, November 9, 2011 ("The justices seemed skeptical of plaintiffs' lawyer Kimberly A. Kralowec's argument that companies have to force the employees to take breaks at certain intervals for health and safety reasons ... [but] pressed [Brinker's lawyer] about the [IWC] wage orders, which indicate that employees can't be required to work more than five consecutive hours without a meal break.")
"High Court Leans Toward in Employers in Brinker," The Recorder, November 9, 2011 ("Lawyers watching the oral arguments on Tuesday sensed the court will most likely issue a nuanced ruling.")
"California high court hears debate over worker breaks," San Francisco Chronicle, November 8, 2011 ("The workers' attorney Kimberly Kralowec said the same rules controlling overtime work were at play.")
"Calif. Top Court Mulls Meal Break Standard In Brinker Suit," Employment Law360, November 8, 2011 ("Kimberly Kralowec of The Kralowec Law Group, an attorney for the plaintiffs, ... drew a parallel between meal break obligations and overtime pay rules, and said that companies should make employees stop working to take required meal breaks just like companies prohibit employees from working unsanctioned overtime hours.")
"California Supreme Court tackles workplace break rules," San Jose Mercury News, November 6, 2011 ("Kim Kralowec, a lawyer for Alvarado and other Brinker employees, said that is why her clients have been fighting for eight years in the courts. 'The reality is, if meal periods are optional, very few workers are going to get them,' she said.")
"Calif. High Court To Hear Long-Awaited Meal Break Case," Employment Law360, November 4, 2011 ("Kimberly Kralowec of The Kralowec Law Group will argue for the plaintiffs on Tuesday.")
"Sleeper issue buried in Brinker: Plaintiffs' lawyers seek to use statistics and surveys to prove claims," Daily Journal, October 17, 2011 ("'What we're looking to see is for the Supreme Court to come back and reaffirm these public policies,' said Michael D. Singer of Cohelan, Khoury & Singer, co-counsel for the plaintiffs with Kimberly A. Kralowec of the Kralowec Law Group.")
"Meal Breaks: Waiting for Brinker," California Lawyer, August 2011 ("The 'make available' versus 'ensure' debate between the appellate districts is the question everyone wants answered, says Kralowec, principal at the Kralowec Law Group in San Francisco.")
"Employment lawyers continue to wait for Brinker decision," Daily Journal, July 19, 2011 ("Kimberly A. Kralowec of The Kralowec Law Group, who represents the plaintiffs in the Brinker case, said she's more concerned about the outcome than how long it takes the court to decide. 'I don't want them to rush it if they need the time,' she said. 'I want it to be done right.'")
"California Top Court Says ‘Labels Matter’; Fleshes Out Prop 64 Standing Requirements," BNA Class Action Litigation Report, February 11, 2011 ("'This decision is correct on the law and it will ensure that the UCL isn’t completely gutted as a consumer protection tool'—a result consistent with the voters’ intention in adopting Proposition 64, Kimberly A. Kralowec, a plaintiffs’ attorney at The Kralowec Law Group and author of the blog, The UCL Practitioner, told BNA.")
"Federal Bench Takes Lead on Meal Cases," Daily Journal, February 2, 2011 ("'We're seeing federal judges having a big impact on developing state law,' said Kimberly Kralowec of the Kralowec Law Group ....")
"Courts Take Conflicting Views on Breaks," Daily Journal, November 2, 2010 ("'We've got two court of appeal panels down the hall from each other, saying they're going to go ahead and issue orders, but initially felt [their] opinions shouldn't be published,' said Kimberly Kralowec of the Kralowec Law Group, co-counsel for plaintiffs in Brinker. 'Then one court granted publication request[s] ....'")
"Price-Fixing Defense Gets Thumbs Down," Daily Journal, July 13, 2010 ("The ruling [in Clayworth v. Pfizer] will help consumers pursue class action lawsuits brought under the Unfair Competition Law (UCL), said Kimberly Kralowec of the Kralowec Law Group in San Francisco.")
"OC Files Suit Against Toyota," Daily Journal, March 15, 2010 ("Kimberly A. Kralowec, a San Francisco lawyer and blogger on 17200 litigation, said such arrangements with outside counsel 'may be the only way public prosecutors' offices can handle some of the cases they should be bringing.'")
"S.F. Lawyer Sets Up Own Shop," Daily Journal, March 8, 2010 ("Kimberly Kralowec left San Francisco plaintiffs' law firm Schubert Jonckheer Kolbe & Kralowec to hang out her own shingle as The Kralowec Law Group. She handles plaintiff-side class actions, including lawsuits filed under California's unfair competition law.")
"Lower Courts Chip at Tobacco Ruling," Daily Journal, January 19, 2010 ("'This trend, if it continues, will roll back the law to certainly pre-Tobacco II days and even pre-Mervyn's days,' said San Francisco attorney Kimberly Kralowec. She was referring to the court's first crack at Prop. 64, when it proclaimed that the measure did not make substantive changes to consumer protection law. Californians for Disability Rights v. Mervyn's, (2006) 39 Cal.4th 223.")
"Court Applies Tobacco II: Prop 64 Changed Standing Requirements, Not Substantive Law," BNA Class Action Litigation Report, October 9, 2009 ("Kimberly A. Kralowec ... told BNA that [Morgan v. AT&T Wireless] was the most significant case to date to interpret the Tobacco II holdings. She said that while the Morgan decision does not contain new holdings, it serves to illustrate and confirm the holdings in Tobacco II.")
"Class Action Appellate Report," Forum, May/June 2009 ("As CAOC Board member Kimberly Kralowec noted on her blog, The UCL Practitioner, 'The bargain was for a product Made in the U.S.A. The plaintiffs were induced to make a purchase and did not get what they paid for, not by any stretch. That is why misrepresentations about geographic origin are prohibited in the first place.'")
"California Family Fitness sued over women-only areas," Sacramento Business Journal, May 1, 2009 ("People would not tolerate men-only clubs, and it took many years and efforts by women to stop discrimination against women, Kralowec said. 'It’s the same situation.'")
"Justices Restrict Fine-Print Lawsuits," The Daily Journal, January 30, 2009 ("[O]ther plaintiffs' attorneys said they worry that the ruling will discourage people from bringing legitimate lawsuits. 'I think it's a significant problem when companies insert unconscionable provisions into their contracts and apparently no one can sue to stop them from doing that,' said Kimberly A. Kralowec of Schubert Jonckheer Kolbe & Kralowec in San Francisco.")
"Does 'Satisfaction Guaranteed' Actually Mean Anything? Yes, or your money back!" Slate, December 19, 2008
"Farmers Insurance Fends Off $115 Million Verdict, For Now," The Daily Journal, Dececember 11, 2008 ("San Francisco attorney Kimberly A. Kralowec, who blogs on California's unfair competition law, said this may be the first opinion to specifically require 'causation' as an element of standing.")
"California Supreme Court to Take Up Meal and Rest Break Case," The Daily Journal, October 23, 2008 ("'I'm very pleased and particularly glad that the Court of Appeal opinion is no longer a citable precedent in California courts,' said Kimberly Ann Kralowec of Schubert Jonckheer Kolbe & Kralowec in San Francisco, who argued on behalf of the workers.")
"Supremes Take 'Brinker' Break Case," The Recorder, October 23, 2008 ("Kimberly Kralowec, a partner with San Francisco's Schubert Jonckheer Kolbe & Kralowec and one of the attorneys representing workers who sued Brinker Restaurant Corp., was elated by the Supreme Court's decision. 'The primary meal period compliance question is an issue that has been raised and actively litigated in dozens of cases in state court and federal court,' she said Wednesday. 'The Brinker ruling created a split of authority. Now the Supreme Court will sort it out.'")
"California Supreme Court to Consider Meal Break Case," Employment Law360, October 23, 2008 ("'I was optimistic that they might take the case up and obviously was very pleased that they decided to do so,' Kralowec said. 'It's a good day for California workers.'")
"Strong Female Voices in the Legal Blogosphere," Law.com, October 6, 2008
"L.A. Targets Insurers With Unlikely Law," The Daily Journal, August 13, 2008 ("Legal observers said that Delgadillo has wielded those unusual powers in an unprecedented manner compared with district attorneys and other city prosecutors. 'I think it is significant. I haven't seen other city attorneys using this tool in what appears to be such a concerted and organized effort against an industry,' said Kimberly Kralowec, a partner with Schubert, Jonckheer, Kolbe & Kralowec in San Francisco. 'It reminds me more about what you might see the state attorney general doing,' Kralowec, who edits a blog devoted to Unfair Competition Law, said.")
"Panel Rejects Class Status for Meal Breaks," The Daily Journal, July 23, 2008 ("But Kimberly A. Kralowec, a partner in the San Francisco law firm of Schubert Jonckheer Kolbe & Kralowec, who represented the workers, downplayed the precedential nature of the ruling. She said appeals court[s] have split on the issue and it would have to be resolved by the state Supreme Court. She called the ruling 'a disaster for California employees.'")
"Workers Can't Catch a Break from Calif. Court," The Recorder, July 23, 2008 (“Kimberly Kralowec, a partner with San Francisco's Schubert Jonckheer Kolbe & Kralowec who handled part of the case against the Brinker Restaurant Corp., called the ruling 'a horrible decision for employees.' 'It will mean that workers are going to be much less likely to get their meal breaks,' she said, adding that she and co-counsel plan to seek review by the California Supreme Court.")
“Lawyer Sues Google Over Ad Placement,” The Recorder, July 18, 2008 (“If Kralowec's name sounds familiar, it may be because she is the longtime author of two legal blogs, The UCL Practitioner, a blog about unfair competition law and class actions in California, and The Appellate Practitioner, a blog about appellate practice in California and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.”) (reprinted from Legal Blog Watch)
“Google Sued for Selling Ads on Parked Domains,” InformationWeek, July 15, 2008 (“In seeking class certification for the lawsuit, Levitte’s attorneys hope to represent other aggrieved Google advertisers. ‘We believe it’s a problem that affects all [Google’s] advertisers equally,’ said Kimberly Kralowec, partner at the law firm representing Levitte.”)
“Livin' la vida blawga and staying within ethical bounds,” Plaintiff Magazine (July 2008) (“Kimberly A. Kralowec, a partner in the San Francisco firm of Schubert Jonckheer Kolbe & Kralowec and a longtime legal blogger, [says,] ‘Regardless of what you say in your blog, no attorney-client relationship is created under the California rules of ethics.’”)
“Big Tech for Small Firms,” California Lawyer (July 2008) (“If you have a very specific area of interest in law, one that can help make your firm stand out from the crowd, a well-written blog can be a provocative attention getter and a potential rainmaker. One example of a well-done blog is The UCL Practitioner, written by San Francisco class action attorney Kimberly A. Kralowec. It has a very tight focus — California's Unfair Competition Law — and is updated frequently.”)
“The Search for Intelligent Life in the Blogosphere,” California Lawyer (May 2008) (“For instance, if Williams needs an update on developments in California's Unfair Competition Law (Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200-17209), he goes straight to The UCL Practitioner (www.uclpractitioner.com). ‘I look there if I need to know the latest in the law,’ Williams says of the blog written by Kimberly A. Kralowec, a partner at Schubert & Reed in San Francisco. ‘I can count on Kimberly for that.’”)
“Debate Heats Up Over Unpublished Opinions,” California Lawyer (May 2008) (“Kimberly Kralowec, an appeals attorney at San Francisco's Schubert & Reed, agrees that a change would mean extra work for lawyers. But she also finds some truth to the claim that the state Supreme Court is much less likely to grant review of unpublished decisions. ‘I can hear the frustration that is coming through in [the Hild] complaint,’ says Kralowec, who blogs at The Appellate Practitioner. ‘Whether it rises to a constitutional violation is a different story.’”)
“$15.6M Awarded In San Francisco Newspaper Clash,” Competition Law 360, March 6, 2008 (“Kimberly A. Kralowec, a partner at Schubert & Reed LLP in San Francisco, said the jury's finding that the Weekly violated California's Unfair Practices Act could be a predicate for a finding by the judge that the defendant also violated the ‘unlawful’ prong of the state's Unfair Competition Law. ‘Indeed, I would expect that such a finding would be virtually compelled by the jury's verdict,’ Kralowec said.”)
“Schubert & Reed Gains Class-Action Attorney,” The Daily Journal, January 14, 2008 (“Kimberly A. Kralowec, a plaintiffs' class-action attorney formerly with the Furth Firm in San Francisco for six years, begins at San Francisco's Schubert & Reed at the end of January.”)
“S.F. Firm Gets First Lateral,” The Recorder, January 11, 2008 (“Kralowec was ready to open her own firm, but when a friend connected her with Schubert & Reed, she saw a fit. On Jan. 28 she’ll join the small San Francisco plaintiff shop, established in 1996, as its first-ever lateral partner.”)
“Leveling the Playing Field,” The Daily Journal, May 4, 2007 (“Based on the rapid appearance of conflicting analyses, the Supreme Court decision in Pioneer Electronics likely will have significant consequences in class actions. See, e.g., … Kimberly Kralowec, ‘Thoughts on the Class-Action Aspects of Pioneer Electronics,’ UCL Practitioner, Jan. 25, 2007.”)
“Class-Action Dissonance,” The Daily Journal, March 5, 2007 (“Kimberly A. Kralowec, in her excellent Web log, The UCL Practitioner (www.uclpractitioner.com), heralded Pioneer Electronics as a pro-class-action decision.”)
“Language on Form Spares Lawyer $500,000,” The Daily Journal, February 16, 2007 (“Rava was represented in the sanctions matter by … Section 17200 expert Kimberly A. Kralowec of San Francisco.”)
“Case of the tour-bus kickbacks: bellhops win big settlement,” San Francisco Bay Guardian, January 3, 2007 (“‘How the case was litigated after we filed suit was certainly interesting,’ Kimberly Kralowec, the plaintiffs’ lawyer, told us.”)
“Tour bus companies settle price-fixing suit,” San Francisco Chronicle, August 30, 2006 (“The settlement, to be reviewed today by San Francisco Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer, would benefit about 1,000 people, plaintiffs’ lawyer Kimberly Kralowec said.”)
“Ruling Renders Prop. 64 Retroactive,” The Recorder, July 25, 2006 (“Kimberly Kralowec, of counsel in The Furth Firm in San Francisco and a recognized expert on Prop 64, called [Mervyn's] a ‘measured decision’ that ‘reached a middle ground.’”)
“Ruling Threatens Consumer Lawsuits,” Los Angeles Times, July 25, 2006 (“Kimberly Kralowec, a San Francisco attorney who handles unfair-competition cases and maintains the blog http://www.uclpractitioner.com, said she was ‘relieved that the broad liability rules seem to be preserved [by the Mervyn’s decision].’ ”)
“Class Actions Hamstrung in Prop 64 Cases,” The Recorder, July 12, 2006 (“Kimberly Kralowec, an of counsel at The Furth Firm in San Francisco who maintains a blog on Prop 64, called the issues addressed in Tuesday’s [Pfizer] ruling the ‘three big ones,’ and believes there’s a chance the opinion could even influence the high court’s thinking on retroactivity.”)
“UCL Suits to Target Illegal Hiring,” The Recorder, July 7, 2006 (“UCL expert Kimberly Kralowec … suggested in an email that … ‘a narrowly-tailored action … might be the best approach.’ ”)
“State's High Court to Untangle Voter-Modified Unfair Competition Law,” San Diego Daily Transcript, Oct. 21, 2005 (“‘The general rule is new legislation applies prospectively only unless there is a clear indication otherwise,’ said Kimberly Kralowec of San Francisco’s Furth Firm[, who] has a blog devoted to the ongoing debate.”)
“Supreme Court Will Decide Prop. 64 Retroactivity,” The Daily Journal, April 28, 2005 (“It was a foregone conclusion that the Supreme Court would resolve the issue, said Kimberly A. Kralowec, a plaintiffs’ lawyer with the Furth Firm who writes a Web log about Proposition 64 and retroactivity. …. ‘It was obvious we needed guidance from the Supreme Court,’ she said. Kralowec added that it is important to resolve the issue as early as possible. ‘If they had waited, these cases would be in limbo longer, and parties would be litigating without knowing if they are litigating on behalf of the general public or not,’ she said.”)
“State High Court to Review Cases in Prop. 64 Flap,” The Recorder, April 28, 2005 (“Kimberly Kralowec, a plaintiff lawyer with the Furth Firm in San Francisco who maintains the 17200blog.com Web site – a de facto clearing house for information on Prop 64 – pointed out Wednesday that the Supreme Court could first decide the question in a separate case that’s been lingering there since 2003.”)
“Clarification" re "Defense Firms Hail Prop. 64,” National Law Journal, February 7, 2005 (“A story on Page 27 of the Dec. 20-27 edition of The National Law Journal, entitled ‘Defense firms hail Prop. 64,’ should have credited a Web log, The UCL Practitioner, http://17200blog.blogspot.com, edited by Kimberly A. Kralowec, with providing some background information for the article, including the approximate number of California firms that sent ‘client alert’ messages.”)
“1st District Rejects Retroactive Use of Initiative on Tort Reform,” The Daily Journal, February 3, 2005 (“The appeals court most likely to address the issue in the immediate future is the 4th District Court of Appeal, which heard oral argument on Proposition 64 in a pair of cases in January, said Kimberly Kralowec, a plaintiffs’ lawyer who writes a Web log about Proposition 64 and retroactivity issues. ... . Plaintiffs’ lawyers cited an advantage to having the first opinion on the subject go their way. ‘On a short-term basis, there’s a huge benefit for plaintiffs,’ Kralowec said. ‘It provides ammunition and clout for plaintiffs in other pending appeals.’”)
“First District Rules Prop 64 Not Retroactive,” The Recorder, February 2, 2005 ("'This [decision] is a victory all around for the plaintiff bar. It's very strongly worded,' said Kimberly Kralowec, a plaintiff lawyer with the Furth Firm whose 17200 Web log has become a popular source of information on retroactivity arguments.")
“Prop 64, In Reverse,” The Recorder, January 24, 2005 ("[W]hen Proposition 64 — which limits the reach of Business & Professional Code § 17200 — passed on Election Day, Kralowec's blog, www.17200blog.com, leaped into the spotlight. The blog and Kralowec, of counsel at The Furth Firm, have quickly become a leading resource in answering Prop 64's $64,000 question: whether the statute is retroactive.")
“Blogging the Law,” Sacramento Bee, January 3, 2005 ("[W]ho knew that a statute of California law ... would be ripe for the blogosphere? Kimberly Kralowec, a San Francisco-based class-action attorney, set up a blog in 2003 that focuses on the state's Unfair Competition Law.... Since [Proposition 64's] passage, the blog (www.17200blog.com) has served as a clearinghouse for California lawyers tracking how Proposition 64 affects cases that predated the initiative.")
“Judge Denies Retroactivity of Proposition 64,” The Daily Journal, January 3, 2005 (“Kramer’s ruling is among more than a dozen superior court decisions that have been issued on the retroactivity issue so far from around the state, according to an online compendium of the cases at www.17200blog.com.”)
“Courts Will Play Role in Effort to Stem Abuse of 17200 Law,” Los Angeles Business Journal, November 29, 2004 ("Kralowec and others believe that the law was used properly, except by a handful of attorneys who abused it. But those abusive cases became notorious ....")
Note, Roxana Mehrfar, "Redefining Commonality for Consumer Class Actions Under California Business and Professions Code Sections 17200 and 17500," 44 Loyola L. A. L. Rev. 353 (Fall 2010)
Robert Carlin, "Chapter 17: Giving San Francisco a Leg to Stand On in UCL Actions," 39 McGeorge L. Rev. 392, 393 n.14 (2008)
Nicole Ochi, "Are Consumer Class and Mass Actions Dead? Complex Litigation Strategies after CAFA and MMTJA," 41 Loy. L. A. L. Rev. 965, 980 n.108 (Spring 2008)
William R. Shafton, "California's Uncommon Common Law Class Action Litigation," 41 Loy. L. A. L. Rev. 783 (Spring 2008)
Saby Ghoshray, "Using Unfair Competition Law to Deter Undocumented Immigration: Examining the Broader Implications of Recent California Litigation," 29 Campbell L. Rev. 233 (Winter 2007)
J. Robert Brown, "Blogs, Law School Rankings, and TheRacetotheBottom.org," University of Denver Sturm College of Law, Legal Studies Research Paper No. 07-33 (July 26, 2007) (available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1003425)
Timothy Sandefur, “The Information Age, Again,” 11 Nexus J. Op. 5, 8-9 (2006)
Bonny E. Sweeney, “Proposition 64 Does Not Apply to Pending Cases,” 14 Competition 11 (2005)
