ELLIS’ EEOC Complaints / SCHNEIDER Trucking re:…
June 1, 2017
JUDGE SLAPS SANCTIONS AGAINST RECALL ADVOCATE
June 1, 2017

TRUCKERS COMPLAINTS / LAWSUITS COMPLAINTS…

TRUCKERS COMPLAINTS / LAWSUITS COMPLAINTS, DISCRIMINATION / SCHNEIDER NATIONAL TRUCKING, SWIFT TRANSPORT, MARLIN & SALTZMAN, CENTRAL REFRIGERATED SERVICE

These are statements I have received from various Drivers since our meeting regarding the threats you mentioned:

 
From: Stan Saltzman <ssaltzman@marlinsaltzman.com>
To: ‘crnevels69@yahoo.com‘ <crnevels69@yahoo.com>; ‘Walter Ellis’ <uedcinc@aol.com>; christina <christina@humphreyrist.com>; lee <lee@hbsslaw.com>; nbeato2012 <nbeato2012@gmail.com>
Cc: paul <paul@cullenlegal.com>; mbradley <mbradley@bradleygrombacher.com>; Tony Baird <tbaird@marlinsaltzman.com>; crnevels69 <crnevels69@yahoo.com>;corkeylee27 <corkeylee27@gmail.com>; jazzmanduke13 <jazzmanduke13@hotmail.com>; mecowhi8 <mecowhi8@msn.com>
Sent: Mon, Oct 17, 2016 5:42 pm
Subject: RE: California Truckers Win $28M in Employment Class Action ..
Mr. Nevels
 I see from the exchange below that you apparently contacted Mr. Walter Ellis, to inquire as to your possible class status.  You should be advised that Mr. Ellis is not an attorney, and is not otherwise handling this class action against Schneider.  My firm is one of the lead class counsel on the case, and can assist you as needed to see if you are properly included in the class settlement.
 I will email you separately, without all the inappropriate “cc” email addressees on the above email, to further this discussion.  Some of them are attorneys involved in the case, but many of the email addresses listed have nothing to do with the case, as far as I know, and I have been handling the matter for over eight years.
Thank you
 Stan Saltzman
Marlin & Saltzman
 
From: chris nevels <crnevels69@yahoo.com>
To: uedcinc <uedcinc@aol.com>
Sent: Thu, Oct 13, 2016 2:38 pm
Hi my name is Christopher R Nevels I worked at Schneider from 1994 to 2006 out of California you can reach me at 682 559 5308 thank you

TRUCKERS COMPLAINTS / LAWSUITS

COMPLAINTS, DISCRIMINATION     /    SCHNEIDER NATIONAL TRUCKING,                                        SWIFT TRANSPORT,          MARLIN & SALTZMAN,         CENTRAL REFRIGERATED SERVICE

Mr. Saltzman,
In regard to your statement  We responded to your objection on other grounds, which we discussed at our meeting at my office last week”, we need to discuss and clarify other subjects that was discussed in the meeting in your office 9/2/2016:
(1).  You asked what it would take for me to drop my OBJECTION to the Class Action?
My reply was that you assist me with legal assistance, or payment toward hiring an Attorney to represent me against SCHNEIDER, where upon you replied something to the effect that it would  be a conflict of interest because you represent the Class Members, and did not want to get involved in my fight with SCHNEIDER, which involved discrimination, and not wages. 
I replied that I had contacted Attorney Christina Humphrey shortly after your firm took this case BICKLEY v SCHNEIDER.  I expressed that I had contacted the previous firm Administrator, expressing my interest in joining the BICKLEY v SCHNEIDER Class Action, whereupon I sent the Administrator my complaints, with emphasis on SCHNEIDER paying AFRICAN AMERICANS wages considerably less than those paid MINORITIES.

HOW DO I VERIFY THE AMOUNT I AM QUALIFIED TO RECEIVE IN:United States District Court Northern District of CaliforniaMORRIS BICKLEY, et al.Plaintiffs,   v. SCHNEIDER NATIONAL, INC., et al., Defendants.

Case No.08-cv-05806-JSW

 The below was received from:

http://www.cptgroup.com/SchneiderNationalSettlement/
As stated above, the total settlement is $28,000,000.00, all of which will
be paid by Schneider National Carriers, Inc. if the Court approves the
settlement. From the $28,000,000.00 total. See attachment:
How to verify my revised settlement

<https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=d97dcbfd65&view=att&th=15c0d1806627812d&attid=0.1&disp=safe&realattid=f_j2qdu7yc0&zw>

  (3).     You expressed your concern that I should be concerned about the anger of the Drivers when they find out that I (we) were holding up their claims from the class action.

These are statements I have received from various Drivers since our meeting regarding the threats you mentioned:
 
From: Stan Saltzman <ssaltzman@marlinsaltzman.com>
To: ‘crnevels69@yahoo.com‘ <crnevels69@yahoo.com>; ‘Walter Ellis’ <uedcinc@aol.com>; christina <christina@humphreyrist.com>; lee <lee@hbsslaw.com>; nbeato2012 <nbeato2012@gmail.com>
Cc: paul <paul@cullenlegal.com>; mbradley <mbradley@bradleygrombacher.com>; Tony Baird <tbaird@marlinsaltzman.com>; crnevels69 <crnevels69@yahoo.com>;corkeylee27 <corkeylee27@gmail.com>; jazzmanduke13 <jazzmanduke13@hotmail.com>; mecowhi8 <mecowhi8@msn.com>
Sent: Mon, Oct 17, 2016 5:42 pm
Subject: RE: California Truckers Win $28M in Employment Class Action ..
Mr. Nevels
 I see from the exchange below that you apparently contacted Mr. Walter Ellis, to inquire as to your possible class status.  You should be advised that Mr. Ellis is not an attorney, and is not otherwise handling this class action against Schneider.  My firm is one of the lead class counsel on the case, and can assist you as needed to see if you are properly included in the class settlement.
 I will email you separately, without all the inappropriate “cc” email addressees on the above email, to further this discussion.  Some of them are attorneys involved in the case, but many of the email addresses listed have nothing to do with the case, as far as I know, and I have been handling the matter for over eight years.
Thank you
 Stan Saltzman
Marlin & Saltzman
 
From: chris nevels <crnevels69@yahoo.com>
To: uedcinc <uedcinc@aol.com>
Sent: Thu, Oct 13, 2016 2:38 pm
Hi my name is Christopher R Nevels I worked at Schneider from 1994 to 2006 out of California you can reach me at 682 559 5308 thank you

Raul F Hernandez NOTIFICATION 7-29-2016

Date:Wed, Dec 28, 2016 10:21 pmAttachments268-1 Raul F Hernand…pdf (2.1 MB)268-2.pdf (1.2 MB)268-main.pdf (63 KB)

From: Walter Ellis <uedcinc@aol.com>
To: randypit <randypit@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Wed, Dec 28, 2016 10:16 pm
Subject: SETTLEMENT NOTICE

I did contact Raul, who stated he did not receive his NOTICE.  Read pdf 268-2 and 268 Main, and see what you make of these pdf’s. The address on the NOTICE is correct.  Maybe you can contact him, he lives in Moreno Valley.


I expressed to you that I was willing and expressed to the court that I recommend that the Drivers receive their payments while the objection is in place.

Since I am barred from obtaining an Attorney due to SCHNEIDER NATIONAL CARRIERS, Inc. and your firms unfair and biased  actions, I am obligated to post these CIVIL RIGHTS violations on the various web and blog sites, see:  http://truckerscomplaint.com/  /  

https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=2479431296321334841#overview/src=dashboard  / 

https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=5434811823980164413#overview/src=dashboard  / 

https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3441851804884253328#overview/src=dashboard

Walter L. Ellis

uedcinc@aol.com 

—-Original Message—–From: Stan Saltzman <ssaltzman@marlinsaltzman.com>

To: ‘Walter Ellis’ <uedcinc@aol.com>; lee <lee@hbsslaw.com>; christina <christina@humphreyrist.com>

Mr. Ellis

First, I did not say that you would get an additional $10,000 for anything.  You advised me that you believed that you were a class member for more than the 4 to 6 weeks attributed to you by Schneider.   I reminded you that you had the right to challenge the workweeks attributed to you, by providing proof of having driven more than the stated number of weeks, and that you had not done so within the period of time provided. 

I believe that I did say, at the time that we met, that if you wished to do that, I might be able to assist by asking that Schneider waive the time period and review your data.  You did not follow up with me at that time.  Now, after the matter has gone to hearing, and the objection filed by you and Mr. Pittman has been overruled, you are again raising the issue.  The question as to how much money a longer time frame might trigger was never addressed, but obviously, since the settlement is based on workweeks, the more weeks one is credited, the more one would receive in settlement.

I seem to recall that the issue of apparently unrecognized workweeks might have related to a period of time when perhaps you were in training, and thus subject to a different pay compensation schedule.  That stated, it is possible that it is something else.

Additionally, I note that several people are copied on this email from you, who I do not recognize.  Please identify who they are, as I will not reply any further until I know who is being copied.  Specifically, I am referring to the following

Finally, Ms. Humphrey is also still being copied on some of your emails, at her new firm.  As you know, Ms. Humphrey is no longer with Marlin & Saltzman, and is no longer associated with this case in any manner.  While I am sure that she is interested in reading our exchanges, without intending any disrespect to her, copying her on a matter where she is no longer of record is inappropriate on your part, and thus she should not be copied any further.   

Respectfully

Stan Saltzman

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=d97dcbfd65&view=att&th=15c13ea6e0723cad&attid=0.4&disp=safe&realattid=f_j2s9nrf53&zw

DECISION BY JUDGE JEFFERY WHITE CONTRIDICTS TESTIMONEY IN: 

Case 4:08-cv-05806-JSW Document 325 Filed 12/22/16 


A letter from: Douglas Normberg 

To: Judge Jeffery White

I am enclosing a copy of the first page of a settlement order I received in the above case. It states quite clearly in the third paragraph, “If, after reading this notice, you wish to receive your settlement payment, then there is nothing more you need to do.” It further states in paragraph 5, “Additionally, if you wish to file an objection to the settlement, you must do so on or before August 5, 2016.”

It is now 92 days after August 15, 2016.  I believe I have been sufficiently patient in waiting for my payment. I did not request an exclusion.  I do not wish to be crude but “Where’s the beef?” and “Show me the money!”

Yours truly,

Douglas Norrmberg

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MORRIS BICKLEY, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

SCHNEIDER NATIONAL, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.08-cv-05806-JSW

ORDER REFERRING COMMUNICATION FROM CLASS MEMBER TO PLAINTIFFS’ cOUNSEL

On December 21, 2016, the Court received a letter from Douglas Norberg, an individual

who appears to have received a copy of the Notice of Proposed Class Action Settlement in this

Action. A copy of the communication from Mr. Norberg is attached to this order.

The Court hereby ORDERS class counsel to communicate with Mr. Norberg regarding the

issues set forth in Mr. Norberg’s letter.

Additionally, the Court advises Mr. Norberg that further questions regarding the status of

the settlement should be directed in the first instance to class counsel, using the following contact

information:

MARLIN & SALTZMAN, LLP

[Lead Counsel for Intermodal and Dedicated Drivers]

Stanley D. Saltzman, Esq. (SBN 90058)

Christina A. Humphrey, Esq. (SBN 226326)

29229 Canwood Street, Suite 208

Agoura Hills, California 91301-1555

Telephone: (818) 991-8080

Facsimile: (818) 991-8081

ssaltzman@marlinsaltzman.com

chumphrey@marlinsaltzman.com

Case 4:08-cv-05806-JSW Document 325 Filed 12/22/16 Page 1 of 2

United States District Court  Northern District of California

 

CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, Objectors respectfully request that this Court deny Plaintiffs’ Motion for Final Approval of Class Acion Settlement in its entirety. Objectors also request that this Court disqualify Class Counsel, mediator and the claims administrator and allow the Class Members to elect new and different Class Counsel, mediator and claims administrator. Additionally, Objectors reserve their right to augment these objections with additional facts, arguments and case law at any time prior to final approval of the settlement.

Dated: August 15, 2016                            By ________

                                                                    Walter L. Ellis, Pro Se        

TRUCKERS COMPLAINTS / CLASS ACTION LAWSUITS

 TRUCKERS COMPLAINTS / CLASS ACTION LAWSUITS

I am 78 years of age, in good health and intend to continue asking for justice. I ask that you assist in resolving these problems. Walter L. Ellis        Sandpiper Dr. /  Lake Elsinore, CA  92530

uedcinc@aol.com / http://truckerscomplaint.com

DECISION BY JUDGE JEFFERY WHITE CONTRIDICTS TESTIMONEY IN: Case 4:08-cv-05806-JSWDocument 325 Filed 12/22/16

CASE NO. 16-16947

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MORRIS BICKLEY; et al.,

Plaintiffs – Appellees,

v.

WALTER L. ELLIS,

Intervenor – Appellant,

v.

SCHNEIDER NATIONAL CARRIERS, INC.,

Defendants – Appellees.

WALTER L. ELLIS, Pro Se                         Lake Elsinore, CA 92530                                  uedcinc@aol.com  

 

A letter from:

Douglas Normberg 

To: Judge Jeffery White

I am enclosing a copy of the first page of a settlement order I received in the above case. It states quite clearly in the third paragraph, “If, after reading this notice, you wish to receive your settlement payment, then there is nothing more you need to do.” It further states in paragraph 5, “Additionally, if you wish to file an objection to the settlement, you must do so on or before August 5, 2016.”

It is now 92 days after August 15, 2016.  I believe I have been sufficiently patient in waiting for my payment. I did not request an exclusion.  I do not wish to be crude but “Where’s the beef?” and “Show me the money!”

Yours truly,

Douglas Normberg

Reply from:  Judge Jeffery White

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MORRIS BICKLEY, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

SCHNEIDER NATIONAL, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.08-cv-05806-JSW

ORDER REFERRING COMMUNICATION FROM CLASS MEMBER TO PLAINTIFFS’ counsel

On December 21, 2016, the Court received a letter from Douglas Norberg, an individual

who appears to have received a copy of the Notice of Proposed Class Action Settlement in this

Action. A copy of the communication from Mr. Norberg is attached to this order.

The Court hereby ORDERS class counsel to communicate with Mr. Norberg regarding the

issues set forth in Mr. Norberg’s letter.

Additionally, the Court advises Mr. Norberg that further questions regarding the status of

the settlement should be directed in the first instance to class counsel, using the following contact information:

MARLIN & SALTZMAN, LLP

[Lead Counsel for Intermodal and Dedicated Drivers]

Stanley D. Saltzman, Esq. (SBN 90058)

Christina A. Humphrey, Esq. (SBN 226326)

29229 Canwood Street, Suite 208

Agoura Hills, California 91301-1555

Telephone: (818) 991-8080

Facsimile: (818) 991-8081

ssaltzman@marlinsaltzman.com

chumphrey@marlinsaltzman.com

Walter Ellis) received the above notification from the Class Action Administrator I an African American asked to be a named Plaintiff, stating the below complaint(s):

 SCHNEIDER’S possible DOT & other Violations

On January 12, 2009 a representative of UAAD spoke to a US FMSCA representative in Sacramento, CA regarding possible DOT violations committed by SCHNEIDER trucking.  These possible violations include the following complaints by drivers:

DBLs require that drivers start their work day in an off duty status while:                                  a. Pre-tripping truck/trailer

  1. Trip planning during load assignment process.  These duty assignments are required prior to starting the 14 hour work day.  Some of the accounts, as WAL-MART, are assigned that will not allow for the load(s) to be delivered within the 14 hour DOT work rule, if drivers show their actual starting time.
  2. Trips are dispatched at an average speed of 45-50 MPH not taking in consideration road conditions, terrain, traffic, time zones etc.
  3. Most WAL MART trips are scheduled so tight that many, if not most, have little or no time after the 14 hour shift to get back to the terminal, or a reasonable DOT break site.  DBLs and their supervisors are aware of these conditions, but fail to make corrections.

The DOT representative stated these were clear violations his department would investigate, and in his opinion were clear violations of DOT rules and regulations.

Health and Safety Issues:

Drivers are assigned to trucks that reek of cigarette smoke and other unsanitary conditions.  Those who complain are told by some DBLs to clean the truck on their own time, and they will be paid a maximum of $40.  Upon contacting OSHA at 909 383-4321, they advised that a complaint would have to be made to:

San Bernardino Department of Public Health

“Tobacco Use Deduction Now”

909 387-6000

After OSHA have received three complaints from that agency, OSHA will than investigate, or take action.

Pay Issues:

SCHNEIDER promised to pay standby pay.  SCHNEIDER does pay standby pay to select drivers.

Drivers are asked to standby sometimes several times a day, some are compensated, most are not.

DBLs state that if you remain in your truck (select driver) at the terminal, rather than going home, you will have priority on those who instead go home as promised when hired for the WAL MART account.

The promised pay based on 2000-2500 miles a week is not now a promise, but instead an expectation.

This account with the select procedures utilized by various DBLs and their supervisors, create an atmosphere and appearance that SCHNEIDER may be using this account to eliminate drivers they don’t want to keep for various reasons.  Once these select drivers prove their dedication to SCHNEIDER, those who are asked to be treated fairly and refuse to break DOT and other regulations will be forced to quit or be fired.

If SCHNEIDER decides to fire a driver they are told that they can appeal to the “FAIR and EQUITABLE POLICY” Board.  That policy allows a driver to first meet with his or her DBL and Supervisor.  If not settled at this level a driver can than appeal to a board consisting of two drivers selected by SCHNEIDER (not you) and SCHNEIDER supervisor(s) to decide your future with the company.  Neither are you as a driver nor your representative allowed to participate in the appeal process.   Fair and Equitable?????

SCHNEIDER’S stated policy is to “log what you do, and do what you log”.  In turn the drivers should get paid for what they do and what they log.

During these economic times it is apparent that all cost of operations should be considered.  It is also important that SCHNEIDER and WAL-MART take in consideration that drivers should receive fair and equitable pay for what they do and what they log.     See:

www.truckerscomplaint.com   Walter L. Ellis   uedcinc@aol.com 951 660-5320

MARLIN & SALTZMAN, LLP

      Canwood Corporate Center

29229 Canwood Street, Suite 208

AgouraHills,California91301 (818)991-

January 7, 2010 Louis M. Marlin

Stanley D. Saltzman

Alan S Lazar

Marcus J. Bradley

www.marlinsaltzman.comIrvineTechnologyCenter

3200ElCaminoReal,Suite100

Irvine, California 92602

(714)669-4750

Dale A. Anderson

KristenM. Fritz

Kiley L. Grombacher

Christina A. Humphrey

Stephen P. O’Dell

LynnP.Whitlock

      Christina A. Humphrey
Attorney at Law

To all Schneider National’s current and former California-based Dedicated and Intermodal Drivers:

In July 2010, you were sent a letter regarding a lawsuit filed by former drivers (they are called “the plaintiffs”)against Schneider National Carriers, Inc. (“Schneider National”, the defendant). The case is called Morris Bickley, et. al. v. Schneider National Carriers, Inc., et. al. This letter serves as a follow-up to the earlier letter you were sent. At this time, we are asking that you call our office if you wish to help us investigate the case.

On August 20, 2010, Morris Bickley and Michael D. Patton, who are both former dedicated drivers, Raymond Grewe, a former intermodal driver, and Dennis Van Horn, a former regional driver, filed an amended or updated complaint against Schneider National on behalf of themselves and all other current and former California-based dedicated and intermodal drivers (plus the regional drivers). My office, along with other lawyers, are handling the claims made for the dedicated and intermodal drivers only. Two other law firms are handling the claims for the regional drivers. These other law firms will be mailing a letter like this to the regional drivers.

The reason you are receiving this letter now is that Schneider National has told us (as the attorneys for the drivers), that you were a California-based Dedicated or Intermodal driver for the company at some point between November 25, 2004 through the present. The plaintiffs are claiming, in the lawsuit we filed for them, that Schneider National does not properly pay for all of the time the drivers work. Among other things, the lawsuit claims that Schneider National does not properly pay for certain tasks the drivers have to do, such as pre-and post-trip inspections, fueling tractors, waiting for dispatch to notify them of their next assignment, waiting in lines for periods of extended time (“Detention Time”), hooking and un-hooking or searching for empty trailers, and filling out and submitting paperwork. The lawsuit also claims that Schneider National improperly calculates mileage pay by “averaging” mileage rather than paying for actual miles driven, and that the company does not provide its drivers with thirty (30) minute uninterrupted meal breaks or paid ten (10) minute rest breaks for each four (4) hour period during which drivers work.

In the next few months, we will be asking the Court to order that the case is a class action, meaning that the case should be permitted to go to trial on behalf of all the California based intermodal and dedicated drivers. In order to assist us, we would be very happy to receive a telephone call from you to talk about your experience with Schneider National, and whether you also had to do the types of work described in the lawsuit without being paid for your work.

You may contact me or my assistant/paralegal, Susan Joseph, by calling us at 1-855-283-9594, or by emailing us at chumphrey@marlinsaltzman.com or sjoseph@marlinsaltzman.com. Thank you for your help,                                                                                                                                                                                                 MARLIN & SALTZMAN  / Christina A Humphrey

I was barred from being a named complaint due to my       complaint included discrimination, see:

To:  MARLIN / SALTZMAN,

It appears that the RACIST REPUBLICAN DONALD TRUMP will be “your” next President, if so I will drop my OBJECTIONS.

Mr. Baird.

I do not agree to your request “Please find attach the motion to advance the hearing date for the Motion to order a bond.”

Mr. Saltzman,

In regard to your statement  We responded to your objection on other grounds, which we discussed at our meeting at my office last week”, we need to discuss and clarify other subjects that was discussed in the meeting in your office 9/2/2016:

(1).  You asked what it would take for me to drop my OBJECTION to the Class Action?

My reply was that you assist me with legal assistance, or payment toward hiring an Attorney to represent me against SCHNEIDER, where upon you replied something to the effect that it would  be a conflict of interest because you represent the Class Members, and did not want to get involved in my fight with SCHNEIDER, which involved discrimination, and not wages. 

I replied that I had contacted Attorney Christina Humphrey shortly after your firm took this case BICKLEY v SCHNEIDER.  I expressed that I had contacted the previous firm Administrator, expressing my interest in joining the BICKLEY v SCHNEIDER Class Action, whereupon I sent the Administrator my complaints, with emphasis on SCHNEIDER paying AFRICAN AMERICANS wages considerably less than those paid MINORITIES.

  (2).    You asked something to the effect, would I drop my objections if you would   be able to         assist me in getting the lien and judgement which amounted to approximately $40,000.00.  You also stated that if I would e-mail you my logs from 8/2008 – 1/2009 you would see that I would paid the “wages” I should have received as a member of the class.  You stated that in your opinion that this should amount to approximately an additional $10,000.00.

  (3).     You expressed your concern that I should be concerned about the anger of the Drivers when they find out that I (we) were holding up their claims from the class action.

I expressed to you that I was willing and expressed to the court that I recommend that the Drivers receive their payments while the objection is in place.

Since I am barred from obtaining an Attorney due to SCHNEIDER NATIONAL CARRIERS, Inc. and your firms unfair and biased  actions, I am obligated to post these CIVIL RIGHTS violations on the various web and blog sites, see:  http://truckerscomplaint.com/  /  

https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=2479431296321334841#overview/src=dashboard  / 

https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=5434811823980164413#overview/src=dashboard  / 

https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3441851804884253328#overview/src=dashboard

Walter L. Ellis

uedcinc@aol.com 

951 660-5320 all calls maybe recorded

 

—–Original Message—–
From: Tony Baird <tbaird@marlinsaltzman.com>
To: Walter Ellis <uedcinc@aol.com> (uedcinc@aol.com) <uedcinc@aol.com>
Cc: ‘Daniel Chaleff (daniel@cr.legal) (daniel@cr.legal)’ <daniel@cr.legal>; Marcus Bradley <mbradley@marlinsaltzman.com>; Sandy Laranjo <slaranjo@marlinsaltzman.com>; ‘Lee Gordon’ <lee@hbsslaw.com>; ‘Peter Hart’ <HartPeter@msn.com>; ‘Paul Cullen’ <paul@cullenlegal.com>; Stan Saltzman <ssaltzman@marlinsaltzman.com>
Sent: Wed, Oct 26, 2016 5:44 pm
Subject: Motion To Advance Hearing Date

Mr. Ellis,

Please find attach the motion to advance the hearing date for the Motion to order a bond.

Thank you.

William A. Baird, Esq.

Marlin & Saltzman
29229 Canwood Street, Suite 208
Agoura Hills, CA  91301
Telephone: (818) 991-8080
Facsimile:  (818) 991-8081
e-mail: tbaird@marlinsaltzman.com
Web:  www.marlinsaltzman.com

—-Original Message—–
From: Stan Saltzman <ssaltzman@marlinsaltzman.com>
To: ‘crnevels69@yahoo.com‘ <crnevels69@yahoo.com>; ‘Walter Ellis’ <uedcinc@aol.com>; christina <christina@humphreyrist.com>; lee <lee@hbsslaw.com>; nbeato2012 <nbeato2012@gmail.com>
Cc: paul <paul@cullenlegal.com>; mbradley <mbradley@bradleygrombacher.com>; Tony Baird <tbaird@marlinsaltzman.com>;  <@yahoo.com>; 27@gmail.com>; jazzmanduke13 <jazzmanduke13@hotmail.com>; mecowhi8 <mecowhi8@msn.com>
Sent: Mon, Oct 17, 2016 5:42 pm
Subject: RE: California Truckers Win $28M in Employment Class Action ..

Mr. Nevels

I see from the exchange below that you apparently contacted Mr. Walter Ellis, to inquire as to your possible class status.  You should be advised that Mr. Ellis is not an attorney, and is not otherwise handling this class action against Schneider.  My firm is one of the lead class counsel on the case, and can assist you as needed to see if you are properly included in the class settlement.

I will email you separately, without all the inappropriate “cc” email addressees on the above email, to further this discussion.  Some of them are attorneys involved in the case, but many of the email addresses listed have nothing to do with the case, as far as I know, and I have been handling the matter for over eight years.

Thank you

Stan Saltzman

Marlin & Saltzman

From: Walter Ellis [mailto:uedcinc@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 1:49 PM
To: Stan Saltzman; christina@humphreyrist.comlee@hbsslaw.com; nbeato2012
Cc: paul@cullenlegal.com; mbradley; Tony Baird; crnevels69@yahoo.com; corkeylee27; jazzmanduke13; mecowhi8
Subject: Fwd: California Truckers Win $28M in Employment Class Action ..

—–Original Message—–
From: Walter Ellis <uedcinc@aol.com>
To: crnevels69 <crnevels69@yahoo.com>
Sent: Fri, Oct 14, 2016 4:58 pm
Subject: California Truckers Win $28M in Employment Class Action ..

California Truckers Win $28M in Employment Class Action ..

·         Schneider National Carriers Class Action

·          www.marlinandsaltzman.com/schneider-National-carriers-class-action

  • Schneider National Carriers Class Action. … SchneiderTrucking, truck … Settlement based on Wal-Mart’s failure to pay all earned vacation pay at the time ..

      Chris. In order to find out your status you should contactwww.cptgroup.com/SchneiderNationalSettlement  If you were a California Driver during the period November 25,2004 to May 25, 2016 you should be a class member.  I have filed an OBJECTION to this class action see:

Headquarters                                                        

CPT Group, Inc: Contact Us   

Class Member Support

For help with any case related inquiries (e.g. Claim Form or Notice requests, settlement check replacement, case status inquiry) please contact our live customer services support desk Toll Free at 1-(877) 705-5021.
16630 Aston Street 
Irvine, CA 92606
Toll Free: 1-(800) 542-0900 Fax: 1-(949) 419-3446Schneider National Carriers Class Action 

·          www.marlinandsaltzman.com/schneider-National-carriers-class-action

  • Schneider National Carriers Class Action. … SchneiderTrucking, truck … Settlementbased on Wal-Mart’s failure to pay all earned vacation pay at the time ..

If i can be of help feel free to contact me Walter Ellis / 951 660-5320 / uedcincaol.comPlease pass this information to other drivers that may qualify in the settlement. You and others may be past the deadline, if so let me know so that your claim may be entered in the APPEAL that I intend to file by 11/10/2016, see:   http://truckerscomplaint.com/

—–Original Message—–
From: @yahoo.com>
To: uedcinc <uedcinc@aol.com>
Sent: Thu, Oct 13, 2016 2:38 pm

Hi my name is Christopher R Nevels I worked at Schneider from 1994 to 2006 out of California you can reach me at 682 559 5308 thank you

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

Comments are closed.

X

Pin It on Pinterest

X