Sevag Chalian v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc et al

  1. September 15, 2022

    CVS Tells 9th Circ. Objector Can't Challenge $10M Wage Deal

    An objector isn't a party in a wage suit settled with a $10.4 million deal between CVS Pharmacy Inc. and a class of workers, CVS argued, saying she can't appeal a lower court's decision to approve the settlement to the Ninth Circuit.

  2. July 29, 2021

    CVS Workers Want 9th Circ. To Review $10M Settlement

    A group of workers objecting to a $10 million wage settlement with CVS Pharmacy Inc. has asked the Ninth Circuit to review a California federal judge's approval of the deal, arguing that it was a result of collusion between the pharmacy chain and some class members.

  3. July 19, 2021

    CVS' $10.4M Worker Training Settlement OK'd Over Objections

    A California federal judge approved a settlement Friday in which CVS will pay $10.4 million to end a suit involving over 24,000 pharmacy employees in California who were allegedly shorted on pay, overruling objections from some settlement class members that included allegations class counsel colluded with CVS.

  4. November 13, 2020

    CVS Pay Deal Disrupted By Rival Suit's Opt-Out Message

    A California federal judge said Friday he'd order a corrective notice sent to some class members in a suit alleging CVS shorted workers' pay, saying counsel representing plaintiffs in a separate employment suit against CVS "crossed the line" by contacting class members and advocating they opt out of a proposed settlement. 

  5. June 22, 2020

    CVS Inks $9.7M Deal In Pharmacy Worker Training Pay Row

    CVS has inked a $9.75 million settlement with pharmacy employees to settle a proposed class action alleging workers were shorted on training pay, according to a California federal court filing made available Monday.

  6. August 25, 2017

    CVS Pharmacists Want To Add Plaintiff To Training Pay Suit

    CVS pharmacists asked a federal judge Friday for permission to add an additional plaintiff to their putative class action alleging workers were shorted on training pay, but rejected claims that the current named plaintiff's claims are barred because he took part in another CVS wage-suit settlement.