Attorney Profile:

David E. Mastagni

David E. Mastagni: Attorney with Mastagni Holstedt, A.P.C.

Biography

David E. Mastagni is a partner with the Labor Department of Mastagni Holstedt, A Professional Corporation He specializes in labor and employment law representation, including trial and appellate litigation in California and federal courts. David is also an experienced PORAC Legal Defense Fund panel attorney and is admitted in U.S. District Court, Southern, Eastern, Northern and Central Districts of California, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court.

Having devoted his legal career to labor and employment litigation with an emphasis on representation of public safety representatives and their members with respect to all aspects of their employment, David has focused on complex civil, class-action, and collective-action litigation matters in labor and employment law, claims arising out of the Fair Labor Standards Act, Public Safety Officers' Procedural Bill of Rights, the California Labor Code, the Myers-Milias-Brown Act, and other statutes guaranteeing labor and employment rights to employees. He is experienced in collective bargaining and interest arbitration to establish terms and conditions of employment.

David has obtained review in cases before the First and Third California Appellate Districts, the California Supreme Court, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and petitioned for review in the U.S. Supreme Court. David is a frequent lecturer on the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights as well as on critical incident investigations, labor relations issues, and the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Martindale-Hubble has issued David the highest Peer Review Rating of “AV Preeminent,” which indicates that his peers rank him at the highest level of professional excellence.

Areas of Practice (2)

  • Civil Litigation
  • Labor and Employment

Education & Credentials

Contact Information:
(916) 491-4289  Phone
www.mastagni.com
University Attended:
University of California at Davis, B.A., Economics & Classical Civilization, 1996
Law School Attended:
University of California, Boalt Hall School of Law, J.D., 1999
Admission:
1999, California and U.S. District Court, Southern, Eastern, Northern and Central Districts of California; Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit; U.S. Supreme Court
Memberships:
State Bar of California; American Bar Association; Sacramento County Bar Association; American Association for Justice.
Reported Cases:
•Abbott v. County of Sacramento (Case No. 2:02-cv-00693-FCD-DAD), a wage and hour collective action for approximately 100 Sacramento County Deputy Sheriffs, settled for approximately $900,000.00 in 2005.
•Abubakar, et al. v. County of Solano (Case No. 6-CV-2268-LKK-EFB), a wage and hour collective action for over 170 Solano County correctional officers, settled for $1.425 million.
•Alba v. City and County of San Francisco (Case No. 3:05-cv-01667-TEH), a wage and hour collective action for approximately 353 San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs, settled for approximately $625,000.00 in 2007.
•Anderson et al. v. The County of Tulare (Case No. 1:05-cv-01498-FVS-SMS), a wage and hour collective action for approximately 95 Tulare County Deputy Sheriffs, settled for $1,100,000.00 in 2007.
•Fay et al. v. The Wackenhut Corporation et al. (San Mateo County Superior Court, Case No. CIV 454586) a wage and hour class action for approximately 203 Wackenhut Corporation security officers, settled for $1.75 million in 2009.
•Ketchum v. City of Vallejo, 523 F. Supp. 2d 1150 (E.D. Cal. 2007), wage and hours case for mounted unit officers overtime for feeding, grooming, transporting and training horses maintained at the officers' residences but used for ancillary mounted patrol duties. In the only published opinion on these issues, the Court overturned a DOL Opinion letter denying claim, found liability against the City of Vallejo, and rejected the City's good faith defense. Aggregate claim of $659,880 settled in 2012 bankruptcy proceedings, pro rata.
•Mitchell v. County Of Monterey (Case No. 5:08-cv-01166-JW) FLSA wage and hour collective action for approximately 22 Monterey County Deputy Sheriffs, settled in 2011 for approximately $441,000 and policy changes that included 8-16 hours of annual compensatory leave for named plaintiffs and non-parties and an overtime definition that surpasses FLSA requirements.
•Orr v. Montague, DeRose & Associates LLC, et al., an individual Wage and Hour case brought pursuant to the FLSA and State Labor Laws, settled for $75,000An FLSA suit filed by eight (8) Alameda County Probation Officers against the County of Alameda for off the clock claims, which settled for over $300,000.00.
•FLSA suit filed by eight (8) Alameda County Probation Officers against the County of Alameda for off the clock claims, settled for over $300,000.
•FLSA claim (unfiled) brought for approximately 60 Mountain View Firefighters against the City of Mountain View, settled for approximately $550,000 in 2006.
•Skaggs v. Yolo County, et al. (Case 2:09-at-1300),1983 suit over constitutional and statutory privacy rights of peace officer settled in 2010.
•Olivera v. Siemens,et al., (Placer County Superior Court Case No. S-CV-0029390) pending case involving constitutional and statutory privacy claims relating to the release of peace officer personnel records.
•Sacramento Police Officer's Ass'n v. Venegas (3rd Dist. 2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 916
•Mortensen v. County of Sacramento, 368 F.3d 1082 (9th Cir. 2004)
•Placer County, Cal. v. Baldwin (2006) 546 U.S. 1170, 126 S.Ct. 1331
•Farnsworth v. City of Sacramento Civil Service Bd., (3rd Dist. 2003) 2003 WL 22793116
•Rath v. Sacramento County Deputy Sheriffs' Ass'n (3d Dist. 2002) 2002 WL 32355
•Stockton Police Officers Ass'n v. City of Stockton, San Joaquin County Superior Court, Case No. 39-2010-00245197 (City cannot reject labor contract by declaring a fiscal emergency.)
ISLN:
914940966

Peer Reviews

  • 4.7/5.0 14 reviews
  • A Martindale-Hubbell Peer Rating reflects a combination of achieving a Very High General Ethical Standards rating and a Legal Ability numerical rating.
  • Legal Knowledge

    4.9/5.0
  • Analytical Capability

    4.9/5.0
  • Judgment

    4.5/5.0
  • Communication

    4.9/5.0
  • Legal Experience

    4.5/5.0
  • 5.0/5.0 by a Of Counsel on 12/28/09 in Personal Injury

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      5.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      5.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 5.0/5.0 by a Partner on 12/15/09 in Labor Law

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      5.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      5.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 5.0/5.0 by a Managing Partner on 12/09/09 in Labor Law

    I know and have worked with David E. Mastagni on a number of important labor law issues. David deserves your highest rating. Read more

    I know and have worked with David E. Mastagni on a number of important labor law issues. David deserves your highest rating.

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      5.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      5.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 5.0/5.0 by a Partner on 12/09/09 in Labor and Employment

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      5.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      5.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 4.8/5.0 by a General Counsel on 03/01/12 in Plaintiffs Personal Injury

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      4.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      5.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 4.8/5.0 by a Managing Partner on 01/19/10 in Litigation

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      5.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      4.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 4.8/5.0 by a Partner on 12/28/09 in Workers Compensation

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      4.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      5.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 4.8/5.0 by a Judge on 12/17/09 in Civil Litigation

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      5.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      4.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 4.8/5.0 by a Partner on 12/09/09 in Litigation

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      5.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      4.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 4.8/5.0 by a Managing Partner on 07/28/09 in Workers Compensation

    • Legal Knowledge

      5.0/5.0
    • Analytical Capability

      5.0/5.0
    • Judgment

      4.0/5.0
    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Legal Experience

      5.0/5.0

    Read less

See All 14 Reviews See All 14 Reviews »


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

Client Reviews

  • 4.8/5.0 3 reviews
  • 100% client recommended 3 recommendations
  • Communication

    5.0/5.0
  • Responsiveness

    5.0/5.0
  • Quality of Service

    4.7/5.0
  • Value for Money

    4.7/5.0
  • 5.0/5.0 on 04/20/15

    The Sacramento County Law Enforcement Managers Association (LEMA) had been in Contract Negotiations with the County for many months resulting in impasse. The Mastagni fi... Read more

    The Sacramento County Law Enforcement Managers Association (LEMA) had been in Contract Negotiations with the County for many months resulting in impasse. The Mastagni firm entered into the process. Working with the team, David Jr provided excellent guidance, building a package the County could not overcome, securing an arbitrated agreement far better than expected. {para}Words cannot effectively describe the outstanding service LEMA received at a reasonable cost.

    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Responsiveness

      5.0/5.0
    • Quality of Service

      5.0/5.0
    • Value for Money

      5.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 5.0/5.0 on 12/29/11

    The Sacramento County Law Enforcement Managers Association has used the Mastagni Law Firm, and specifically David E. Mastagni in Labor and Employment issues such as: Cont... Read more

    The Sacramento County Law Enforcement Managers Association has used the Mastagni Law Firm, and specifically David E. Mastagni in Labor and Employment issues such as: Contract Negotiations, Arbitration, Employee Grievances, Discipline and Unfair Labor Practice Suits. David E. Mastagni has the highest ethical and professional standards we have seen. He is "top-notch" and respected in his field and their services are very reasonably priced.

    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Responsiveness

      5.0/5.0
    • Quality of Service

      5.0/5.0
    • Value for Money

      5.0/5.0

    Read less

  • 4.5/5.0 on 10/26/11

    Read more

    • Communication

      5.0/5.0
    • Responsiveness

      5.0/5.0
    • Quality of Service

      4.0/5.0
    • Value for Money

      4.0/5.0

    Read less

See All 3 Reviews Write a Review

Disclaimer

Documents ({{amountArticles}})

Documents by this lawyer on Martindale.com
Other documents: ,

Video

Play Video

Locations

Contact David E. Mastagni

Please correct the fields highlighted in red.

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.