Cindi Ritchey has more than 15 years of experience representing clients in employment litigation. She primarily focuses on complex wage and hour class actions and representative actions under state and federal laws, including actions under the California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA). She also has extensive experience defending employers in single and multiplaintiff employment lawsuits, including lawsuits involving Title VII, ADA, FMLA, and California antidiscrimination law, unfair competition claims, wrongful termination, and employment-related tort and contract claims, as well as administrative agency actions. Cindi offers clients in-depth experience advising employers on issues such as compliance with state and federal wage and hour laws, antidiscrimination laws, leave laws, noncompete agreements, and wage and hour matters and also has experience conducting training for employers on preventing sexual harassment in the workplace.
Cindi has been named 10 times as a Southern California "Rising Star" in the area of employment law, an honor reserved for the top 2.5 percent of up-and-coming lawyers under age 40 in Southern California.
Prior to law school, Cindi worked as a paralegal specialist in the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, where she participated in investigations of potentially anticompetitive mergers in the area of telecommunications and assisted in investigations of telecommunications industry compliance with the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
The following represents experience prior to joining Jones Day.
Tomlinson v. IndyMac Bank (C.D. Cal. 2005). Hybrid wage and hour class action alleging an FLSA collective action and a Rule 23 class action. Case was settled on terms favorable to IndyMac.
Barnett, et al. v. Washington Mutual Bank (N.D. Cal.). Several wage and hour class actions raising claims under the FLSA and California law, all of which were settled on terms favorable to Washington Mutual Bank.
ARCS v. GMAC Commercial Mortgage (L.A. County Superior Court). Represented GMAC Commercial Mortgage and others in dispute about hiring away employees of a competitor and alleged misappropriation of trade secrets. Case was settled on terms favorable to GMAC Commercial Mortgage.
Hartt v. Sony Electronics, Inc. (C.D. Cal.). Obtained judgment on the pleadings in case of first impression involving the scope of California Labor Code § 96(k). Trial court decision was affirmed by 9th Circuit.
- September 2006
What You Don't Say Can Hurt You - Federal Court Holds Hospital Liable for Failure to Disclose Physician's Drug Addiction to Subsequent Employer, ASHHRA/IRI Consultants to Management, Inc. Semi-Annual Labor Activity in Healthcare Report
- January 19, 2017
Labor & Employment Update 2017: A Look Ahead for California Employers
- September 28, 2015
The Latest Claims Arising From Miscalculation of Regular Rate of Pay and Overtime, and California's New Paid Sick Leave Law, American Conference Institute 25th National Forum on Wage & Hour Claims and Class Actions
- June 26, 2009
FLSA Collective Actions vs. Rule 23 Class Actions, Bridgeport CLE Wage and Hour Litigation Program
- New York University (J.D. 2001); University of California, Berkeley (B.A. in Political Science 1996; Phi Beta Kappa; Dean's Honor List)
- California, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and U.S. District Courts for the Central, Eastern, Northern, and Southern Districts of California
- Paralegal Specialist, Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice (1996-1998)