People: Eden E. Anderson, Counsel

Photo of Eden E. Anderson, Counsel

Eden E. Anderson

Counsel

San Francisco
Direct: (415) 544-1021
Fax: (415) 397-8549
0

Eden Anderson is counsel in the Labor & Employment Department of Seyfarth Shaw.  Her practice is focused on litigation, both at the trial and appellate court levels.  Ms. Anderson has handled scores of appeals in both state and federal courts in employment, ERISA, disability access, and wage/hour class action cases.  She also defends these cases in the trial courts.

Eden Anderson is counsel in the Labor & Employment Department of Seyfarth Shaw.  Her practice is focused on litigation, both at the trial and appellate court levels.  Ms. Anderson has handled scores of appeals in both state and federal courts in employment, ERISA, disability access, and wage/hour class action cases.  She also defends these cases in the trial courts.

Education

  • J.D., University of California, Berkeley (2004)
    Moot Court Competition, Best Brief

  • B.S., University of California, Berkeley, magna cum laude (2000)
    Phi Beta Kappa; Women’s Golf Team Captain

Admissions

  • California

Courts

  • All Federal and State Courts of the State of California
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Affiliations

  • American Bar Association
  • California Bar Association
  • Bar Association of San Francisco
  • University of California, Berkeley Women’s Golf Steering Committee

Representative Engagements

Representative Class Actions

  • Gonzales v. Lime Energy Co., Case No. 09-484745 (Cal. Super. Ct.) (defending and settling wage-hour class action by employees alleging entitlement to commute time and overtime wages). 
  • Palmer v. Michaels Stores, Inc., Case No. 37-2007-00074038 (Cal. Super. Ct.) (defeating certification in class action alleging violations of the Song-Beverly Credit Card Act). 
  • Chapman v. Intel Corp., Case No. 082329 (defending wage-hour class action alleging exempt misclassification of systems integrators). 
  • Alexander v. IKON Office Solutions, Case No. 07-466832 (Cal. Super. Ct.) (defending wage-hour class action alleging exempt misclassification of account managers).
  • Kenny v. Regis Corp., Case No. 06-7521 (N.D. Cal.) (dismissing parent corporation in wage and hour class action).

Representative Appellate Matters

  • Pittman v. Siemens Medical Solutions Diagnostics, 651 Fed.Appx. 656 (9th Cir. 2016) (affirming dismissal of class action complaint).
  • Morris B. Silver M.D., Inc. v. ILWU-PMA Welfare Plan, 2 Cal.App.5th 793 (2016) (affirming ruling that medical provider’s claim for intentional interference with contractual relations was preempted by ERISA).
  • Airline Pilots Assoc. Int’l v. United Airlines, Inc., 223 Cal.App.4th 706, 713 (2014) (affirming summary judgment in case involving unique ERISA preemption issues and the California Kin Care law). 
  • Arnold v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co., 202 Cal.App.4th 580 (2011) (affirming summary judgment on insurance agent’s claim she was improperly classified as an independent contractor).
  • Ramsey v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., et al., Case No. B215757 (2nd DCA 2010) (affirming grant of summary judgment on age discrimination and retaliation claims).
  • Tyler v. Wells Fargo Financial California, Inc., Case No. C059602 (3rd DCA 2009) (affirming grant of summary judgment on age discrimination claim).
  • Bryant, et al. v. Sara Lee Bakery Group, Inc., et al., Case No. A120084 (1st DCA 2008) (affirming grant of summary judgment on race harassment claims and jury trial verdict on race discrimination and retaliation claims in multi-plaintiff case).
  • Bharji v. NUMMI, et al., Case No. A115048 (1st DCA 2007) (affirming jury verdict against plaintiff who alleged 18 causes of action, including disability discrimination and harassment, retaliation, and wrongful termination).
  • Emmer v. Adobe Systems, Inc., Case No. H030685 (6th DCA 2007) (affirming trial court’s denial of plaintiff’s anti-SLAPP motion).
  • Wachovia Securities, LLC. v. Bruce Wiegand, Case No. 07CV243 (S.D. Cal. 2007) (vacating arbitration award in wrongful termination case).
  • Reid v. Google, 155 Cal. App. 4th 1342 (2007) (reversing summary judgment in age discrimination case).

Representative Disability Access Matters

  • Rush v. Pier 1 Imports Inc., 592 Fed.Appx. 609 (9th Cir. 2015) (affirming grant of summary judgment on plaintiff’s ADA Title III claims).
  • Chapman v. Pier 1 Imports (U.S.) Inc., 779 F.3d 1001 (9th Cir. 2015) (reversing in part grant of summary judgment on ADA Title III claims).
  • Paulick v. Ritz-Carlton Hotel Co., LLC, 2011 WL 6141015 (N.D. Cal. 2011) (granting partial summary judgment on issue of whether a hotel operator was liable for alleged design and construction discrimination under Title III of the ADA).
  • Rush v. Castle & Cooke Corona Inc., 2011 WL 13109296 (C.D. Cal. 2011) (granting summary judgment on plaintiff’s ADA Title III claims).
  • Martinez v. Wendy’s Int’l, Inc., Case No. 01962 (E.D. Cal.) (defending and settling disability access claim under Title III of the ADA and California’s Unruh Act and Disabled Persons Act). 
  • Temple v. Squaw Valley Ski Corp., Case No. 00421 (E.D. Cal.) (same).
  • Burke v. Heavenly Valley, LP, Case No. 00957 (E.D. Cal.) (same).
  • McIver v. Michaels Stores, Inc., 01975 (S.D. Cal.) (same).
  • McCarthy v. RP SCS Cupertino Hotel, LLC, Case No. 08-4361 (Cal. Super. Ct.) (same).

Publications

  • Author, “LSAC Agrees To Pay Over $9 Million To Settle Lawsuit Over Testing Accommodations And Commits To Substantial Injunctive Relief,” ADA Title III News & Insights Blog, Seyfarth Shaw LLP (2014)
  • Author, “Court Holds That Hospital Does Not Have To Provide Live Interpreter For Patient ‘In The Throes Of A Serious Heart Attack’ Where Other Effective Means Provided,” ADA Title III News & Insights Blog, Seyfarth Shaw LLP (2014)
  • Author, “New Justice Guidance Reminds Businesses They Are Responsible for Ensuring Their Communications with People with Disabilities Are Effective,” ADA Title III News & Insights Blog, Seyfarth Shaw LLP (2014)
  • Author, “ADA Plaintiff’s Efforts to Block Barrier Removal During Lawsuit Deemed ‘Frivolous on Many Levels’,” ADA Title III News & Insights Blog, Seyfarth Shaw LLP (2012)
  • Author, “Reasonable Modification to Policies, Practices, or Procedures Must Be Considered When Requested by a Person with Disability,” ADA Title III News & Insights Blog, Seyfarth Shaw LLP (2012)
  • Author, “Highlights From Access Board Webinar On New ADA Mini-Golf Course Requirements,” ADA Title III News & Insights Blog, Seyfarth Shaw LLP (2012)
  • Co-Author, “Ninth Circuit Issues Yet Another Opinion Imposing More Stringent Pleading Requirements in ADA Title III Lawsuits” (2011)
  • Chapter Author, “Chapter 3 - Receipt of Wage-Hour Complaint,” Wage & Hour Collective and Class Litigation, ALM Law Journal Press (2012). Definitive treatise on wage and hour litigation.
  • Contributing author, “ALM Wage-Hour Collective and Class Action Litigation Manual” (2011 anticipated publication)
  • Contributing author, “Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act - Key Issues and Developments” (2009)
  • Author, Supervisory Liability for Sexual Harassment under the FEHA: An Analysis of Department of Health Services v. Superior Court (McGinnis), 94 Cal. App. 4th 14 (2001)