ABOUT US

Forty Years of Fighting for You.

Righetti Law: Forty Years of Standing Up for Our Clients’ Rights

In the early 1990s, Righetti Law was one of only a small handful of firms seeking to enforce California’s minimum wage and overtime laws through the class action mechanism, where courts resolve common issues in a single proceeding for hundreds or thousands of individual workers. More than thirty years later, this area of law remains at the center of our practice. We also handle both large, complex class action cases involving the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), and a wide range of other matters involving individual rights.

While many of the cases we handle seek class-wide and injunctive relief, we also prosecute individual claims.

What sets Righetti Law apart is simple: we try cases. We are one of only a small group of plaintiff’s firms to have taken multiple class actions through trial — and when companies know that, negotiations change. We don’t threaten litigation. We litigate.

Matthew Righetti

Matthew Righetti Founding Attorney, Righetti Law Firm, P.C.

Matthew Righetti founded Righetti Law Firm, P.C. and has been practicing law for forty years. For thirty-three of those years, the primary focus of his work has
been complex class action and representative action litigation: prosecuting wage and hour claims under state and federal law, privacy claims under the FCRA,
CCPA, and CCCRA, and a broad range of consumer matters.

From offices in San Francisco, Matthew has represented workers and consumers against some of the largest corporations in the country and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars on their behalf. He is nationally recognized as a skilled and committed advocate.

Matthew is one of the few plaintiff’s attorneys in California to have taken multiple class actions through trial. Righetti Law served as trial counsel in what
the firm believes are the only four class action overtime cases ever successfully tried under the quantitative executive exemption standard established in Ramirez v. Yosemite Water Company (1999) 20 Cal.4th 785. Those cases were tried against U-Haul, Party City, Sav-On Drug Stores, and Taco Bell. Recently, Matthew
prevailed at trial in seating litigation against Trader Joe’s on behalf of cashiers and demo station workers.

Recent Significant Results

Trader Joe’s Seating Litigation — Co-lead counsel. Following a bench trial in 2024, the San Mateo County Superior Court ruled in favor of Trader Joe’s crew members and awarded $30 million in penalties, plus attorney fees and costs. Appeal pending.

MAC Cosmetics — Co-lead counsel in litigation alleging failure to properly calculate wages owed to non-exempt California store employees. Resolved in
federal court in 2025 for $12 million.

Rocket Mortgage — Co-lead counsel in litigation alleging failure to pay all wages owed to non-exempt California employees. Resolved in 2024 for $4.5 million.

Wal-Mart Seating Litigation — Co-lead counsel. Following the California Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling in Kilby v. CVS (2016) establishing the definitive
construction of California’s seating law, Wal-Mart settled for $65 million on the eve of trial.

In re Trans Union Privacy Litigation (MDL, N.D. Illinois) — Appointed co-lead counsel by the federal district court in multidistrict litigation focused on Trans
Union’s sale of confidential consumer financial data in violation of the FCRA. Settled for more than $100 million, including $75 million in cash — the certified
class is believed to be the largest ever certified in the United States.

Appellate Experience

Matthew’s cases regularly travel through state and federal appellate courts.
Notable decisions include:

Sav-On Drug Stores, Inc. v. Superior Court (2004) 34 Cal.4th 319. The California Supreme Court unanimously reversed the Court of Appeal and reinstated the trial
court’s class certification order.

Gentry v. Circuit City Stores, Inc. (2007) 42 Cal.4th 443. The California Supreme Court established the factors trial courts must apply when evaluating motions to compel arbitration that ban class actions.

Rutti v. Lojack Corp., Inc. (2010) 596 F.3d 1046. The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s summary judgment, setting parameters for compensable hours
worked under state and federal law.

Kilby v. CVS Pharmacy (2016) 63 Cal.4th 1. The California Supreme Court issued a unanimous, definitive ruling on California’s seating law, reshaping the legal
landscape for workers statewide.

He has also represented plaintiffs in the Fourth Circuit, Seventh Circuit, Federal Circuit, and before the NLRB, and has appeared as amicus counsel in state and
federal appellate proceedings.

Honors and Recognition

Matthew received the Daily Journal’s 2017 CLAY Award (“California Lawyer of the Year”) for his work on suitable seating litigation. The recognition is given to
attorneys who “dazzled in the courtroom and in the boardroom, setting a standard for excellence to which all litigators and corporate lawyers should aspire.” He was also named one of the Daily Journal’s Top Labor and Employment Lawyers for 2017.

He is a regular invited speaker at continuing legal education programs and bar association events nationwide, covering class action litigation, discovery, trial
strategy, mediation and settlement, arbitration agreements, and ethics. Speaking engagements have included the American Conference Institute, California Employment Lawyers Association, Bridgeport CEB, and the Industrial Relations Association, among others.

Education

University of San Francisco School of Law, J.D., 1985
University of California, Berkeley, B.A., Economics, 1982

Bar Admissions

California | U.S. Court of Appeals
Ninth Circuit | U.S. Court of Appeals
Fourth Circuit | U.S. Court of Appeals
Federal Circuit | U.S. District Court
Northern District of California | U.S. District Court
Central District of California | U.S. District Court
Eastern District of California | U.S. District Court
Southern District of California | U.S. District Court
Northern District of Illinois

What Courts and Clients Say

"The Court is satisfied that class counsel has capably represented the class in a manner which has resulted in a settlement well received by the class and which has been approved by this court. This case presented untried issues of law."

Circle K Overtime Cases, JCCP 4267, Honorable William F. McDonald, Order on Final Approval of Class Action Settlement

"Class counsel have extensive experience litigating class actions, particularly in the area of labor and employment, and prosecuted this matter efficiently and with a high degree of professionalism. Class counsel's costs in prosecuting this action are hereby approved as reasonably incurred."

Lopez et al. v. Euromarket Designs, Inc. (d/b/a Crate and Barrel), Case No. BC436515, Judge Soussan G. Burguera, Order on Final Approval of Class Action Settlement

"Class counsel capably represented the class in a manner which has resulted in a settlement well received by the class and which has been approved by this court. This case presented issues of law which are hardly settled in the field of wage and hour litigation, and the court recognizes that the attorneys for the class worked diligently and responsibly for the interests of the class members."

Groves et al. v. Ross Stores, Case No. RG04183362, Honorable Steven Brick, Order on Final Approval of Class Action Settlement

"I recently had an issue regarding exempt/non-exempt classification with a previous employer. I had not been paid for overtime hours that I had worked. I contacted Righetti Law and quickly spoke to Matt Righetti. He kept me informed along every step of the way, and the whole process was very transparent. In a very short period of time, Mr. Righetti not only got me the compensation I was entitled to, but he was also able to get me penalties and fees that were owed as well. My entire experience with Matt and his firm was amazing, and I could not have been happier. I would highly recommend Matt and the Righetti Law firm to anyone who needs representation with a labor issue."

N.V.
Google

Recent Settlements

$0Million

Failure to Provide Seats

$0Million

Violation of FCRA

$0Million

Meal and Rest breaks

$0Million

Misclassification of AMs

$0Million

Misclassification of fast food managers

Live chat