Cary G. Palmer

Cary G. Palmer: Attorney with Jackson Lewis P.C.
  • Office Managing Principal at Jackson Lewis P.C. (894 Attorneys)
  • 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 1600, Sacramento, CA 95814
    View Cary G. Palmer's office location
  • Peer Reviews

    No Reviews
  • Profile Visibility [ i ]
    • #105 in weekly profile views out of 9,007 Attorneys in Sacramento, CA
    • #46,947 in weekly profile views out of 1,822,215 total attorneys Overall


Cary G. Palmer is a Principal in the Sacramento, California, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. He represents management in employment, labor and benefits law and related litigation.

Mr. Palmer practices before the state and federal courts in California, the United States Department of Labor, the United States Equal Opportunity Commission, the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, and the California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board. Mr. Palmer also defends management in statewide and nationwide class action and collective action litigation. He also defends management in litigation involving wrongful termination, reductions in force, discrimination, harassment, breach of contract, wage and hour, benefits, and other labor and employment-related actions. Mr. Palmer also conducts employee and management training seminars, and provides proactive employment advice and counsel.

Mr. Palmer is a class action and wage and hour specialist; he is the firm’s California Region Wage and Hour Coordinator. Mr. Palmer has extensive experience in all aspects of class action litigation, including proactive and preventative strategies, budgeting, state-wide defense efforts, class-wide discovery, arbitrations, mediations, exposure analyses, class certification, investigations, depositions and experts.

Representative Wage and Hour Class Action Experience

Mr. Palmer has handled/co-handled more than 100 class actions during the past 20 years. The cases have involved many different wage and hour issues, including alleged misclassification of employees (under the executive, administrative, professional, computer software, and inside/outside sales exemptions), independent contractors, vacation, sick leave and paid time off, wages, bonuses, commissions, overtime, off-the-clock work, meal and rest periods, recordkeeping, wage statements, reimbursement of business expenses, dress and grooming, donning and doffing, criminal convictions, and suitable seating.

Mr. Palmer has defeated class certification in several recent wage and hour class actions. See Ana Mora, et al. v. Big Lots Stores, Inc. (2011) 194 Cal.App.4th 496 (California court of appeal upheld the trial court’s order denying class certification in executive exemption case; trial court denied class certification concluding common questions did not predominate over individualized inquiries because the activities performed by store managers varied substantially based on the size of the store, the type of merchandise each store carries, the number employees supervised, the time of year, the personality and judgment of the individual store manager and additional, periodic challenges at particular stores.); Jin v. Ben Bridge-Jeweler, Inc. (2009, 2:07-CV-1587-CEB-KJN) (Federal court denied plaintiff’s class certification motion for alleged meal period violations because plaintiff failed to show common factual issues predominated over individualized issues); and Baker v. Big Lots Stores, Inc. (2009, CV 08-01450 GAF (FMOx)) (Federal Court denied plaintiff’s class certification motion for allegedly missed rest periods).

Mr. Palmer has also successfully represented clients in several additional published wage-hour class action decisions. See Bryan de Simas, et al. v. Big Lots Stores, Inc. (2007 U.S. Dist. Lexis 19257) (Federal court granted employer’s motion to stay wage-hour class action under the Colorado River abstention doctrine, and denied plaintiffs’ motion for leave under the California Private Attorneys’ General Act); and The TJX Companies, Inc. v. Superior Court (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 747 (California court of appeal court upheld employer’s right to hearing and oral argument in wage-hour class action).

Published Works

• Recent Developments in Overtime Exemptions, ACC Legal Resources (July 2, 2014) [Co-Author]
• Top Ten Wage and Hour Traps, ACC Legal Resources (March 13, 2013) [Author]
• California’s Meal and Rest Period Saga Escalates, The Daily Recorder (February 2006) [Co-Author]
• Employers May Fight Back Through The Class Action Fairness Act, The Daily Recorder (May 4, 2005) [Co-Author]
• Harrah’s Policy Requiring Women to Wear Makeup Upheld by Federal Appeals Court, The Daily Recorder (February 23, 2005) [Co-Author]
• California Supreme Court Leaves Flood Gates Open for Overtime Class Actions, The Daily Recorder (September 1, 2004) [Co-Author]
• Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004, The Daily Recorder (June 11, 2004) [Co-Author]
• Bounty Hunters Take Aim at California Employers, The Daily Recorder, (June 10, 2004) [Co-Author]
• Court Limits Legal Protections for Employer’s E-Mail System, The Daily Recorder (August 6, 2003) [Co-Author]
• California’s New Employment Laws, Parts 1 and 2, The Daily Recorder (November 20 and 27, 2002) [Co-Author]

In the News

December 19, 2017
The Registry

Cary Palmer Discusses the Expansion of of Jackson Lewis in Sacramento

Cary Palmer discusses the recent expansion and growth of Jackson Lewis' Sacramento office in NKF Announces Expansion of Jackson Lewis P.C. in Sacramento, published by The Registry. Subscription may be required to view article


February 11, 2019

California’s Reporting Time Pay Applies to Telephone Calls to Confirm Scheduled Shifts

For more than 75 years, California’s Wage Order No. 7 has required employers to compensate employees with reporting time pay if employees are required to report for work and in fact show up, but are then provided less than an established minimum number of hours of work or are provided with no work at all. Instead of actually requiring...

December 12, 2018

Class Action Trends Report Fall 2018

Our quarterly report discusses new developments in class action litigation and offers strategic guidance and tactical tips on how to defend such claims. This issue covers the following topics: Are you my employer? A patchwork of tests Only in California Prevention pointer Other class action developments

August 13, 2018

Class Action Trends Report Summer 2018

Our quarterly report discusses new developments in class action litigation and offers strategic guidance and tactical tips on how to defend such claims. This issue covers the following topics: Disparate impact - discrimination by the numbers Is the FCRA class the new FLSA wage and hour class? Other class action developments...


Class Actions and Complex Litigation Webinar Series

When March 14, 2017 - 2:00 PM to 3:00 PM EST

Credits: Continuing education credit was offered for the live broadcast of this seminar.
You cannot earn credit for watching the archived webinar.

Class Actions and Complex Litigation Webinar Series

When February 14, 2017 - 2:00 PM to 3:00 PM EST

Credits: Continuing education credit was offered for the live broadcast of this seminar.
You cannot earn credit for watching the archived webinar.

Class Actions and Complex Litigation Webinar Series

When January 10, 2017 - 2:00 PM to 3:00 PM EST

Credits: Continuing education credit was offered for the live broadcast of this seminar.
You cannot earn credit for watching the archived webinar.


Wage and Hour
California Piece-Rate Law Upheld by Court of Appeal
January 11, 2019

Rejecting an argument that the use of the phrase “other nonproductive time” rendered the statute unconstitutionally vague, a California Court of Appeal recently upheld the state’s law regarding compensation of piece-rate workers. Nisei Farmers League v. California Labor & Workforce Dev. Agency, 2019 Cal. App. LEXIS 10 (Cal. Ct. App.

By Cary G. Palmer and Dalia Z. Khatib

California Workplace Law
California Enacts New Laws to Combat Human Trafficking
October 22, 2018

On September 27, 2018, California enacted Senate Bill 970 establishing a minimum threshold for human trafficking awareness training and education in the hospitality industry.

By Kaitlyn L. Lavaroni and Cary G. Palmer

California Workplace Law
Taco Bell’s Prohibition on Employees “Heading for the Border” With Discounted Meals Does Not Violate California Meal Break Law, Ninth Circuit Rules
August 8, 2018

Affirming a district court order dismissing a putative class action, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has held that Taco Bell’s policy of requiring employees to eat employer-discounted meals in the restaurant does not convert the meal period into “on duty” time such that the meal period becomes compensable under California law.

By Cary G. Palme

Areas of Practice (7)

  • Class Actions and Complex Litigation
  • Wage and Hour
  • Hospitality
  • Real Estate
  • Retail and Consumer Goods
  • Technology
  • Transportation

Education & Credentials

Contact Information:
(916) 341-0404  Phone
(916) 341-0141  Fax
University Attended:
Brigham Young University Marriot School of Management, B.S., cum laude, 1991
Law School Attended:
University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law, J.D., 1996
Year of First Admission:
2004, U.S. District Court, Northern Districts of California; 1996, U.S. District Court, Central District of California; 2003, U.S. District Court, Eastern Districts of California; 1998, U.S. District Court, Southern District of California; 1996, California

Professional Associations and Activities

•American Bar Association
•State Bar of California

Reported Cases:
TJX v. Superior Court (2001) 87 Col.App.4TH 747; Bryan deSimas v. Big Lots Stores, Inc. (2007) U.S. Dist. Lexis 19257).

Peer Reviews

This lawyer does not have peer reviews.

*Peer Reviews provided before April 15, 2008 are not displayed.

Documents (3)

Documents by this lawyer on

Sacramento, California

Contact Cary G. Palmer

Required Fields

Required Fields

By clicking on the "Submit" button, you agree to the Terms of Use, Supplemental Terms and Privacy Policy. You also consent to be contacted at the phone number you provided, including by autodials, text messages and/or pre-recorded calls, from Martindale and its affiliates and from or on behalf of attorneys you request or contact through this site. Consent is not a condition of purchase.

You should not send any sensitive or confidential information through this site. Emails sent through this site do not create an attorney-client relationship and may not be treated as privileged or confidential. The lawyer or law firm you are contacting is not required to, and may choose not to, accept you as a client. The Internet is not necessarily secure and emails sent though this site could be intercepted or read by third parties.