0.00
Employment Law
Washington
Contact Information
600 Stewart St # 1100, Seattle, Washington 98101
206-973-5298
https://www.emeryreddy.com/attorneys/...
Detailed Information

Education

  • J.D., Seattle University School of Law, 2003
  • M.B.A, University of Washington, 2013
  • B.B.A, Pacific Lutheran University, 1999

Admitted to Practice

  • Washington State;
  • Utah State;
  • S. District Court, Western District of Washington;
  • S. District Court, Eastern District of Washington;
  • S. District Court, District of Colorado;
  • S. District Court, District of Utah;
  • Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Areas of Concentration

  • Employment Law
  • Consumer Law
  • Privacy Rights Law

Professional and Community Involvement

  • Inns of Court
  • Association of Corporate Counsel
  • Washington State Association for Justice
  • Washington State Trial Lawyers Association, EAGLE member

Background

Timothy W. Emery is a founding member of Emery | Reddy. Tim is dedicated to protecting Washington workers and consumers by suing serial violators of their civil rights. Tim and his team practice on the cutting edge of Employment Law, blending decades of trial work with a particular expertise in worker’s rights advocacy. After nearly a decade serving as General Counsel to large corporations, Tim focuses 100% of his practice on complex class action litigation.

Recent Successes (2023 – 2024)

  • Over $50,000,000 in negotiated awards in 2024 for thousands of Washington workers
  • Second largest resolution in Washington state history for data and privacy breaches — Garcia v. Washington State Department of Licensing, No. 22-2-05635-5 (King County Super. Ct.)
  • $9,889,985.51 judgment for non-compete violation — Jens v. Tori Belle Cosmetics, LLC, No. 22-2-06641-5 (King County Super. Ct.)
  • Co-lead counsel in Nunley v. Chelan-Douglas Health Dist., No 39571-5-III, 2024 Wash. App. LEXIS 2196 (October 31, 2024), a landmark privacy case holding that companies that collect PII and PHI have a duty to use reasonable care storing this information.

Recent Class Action Matters

  • Abbot v. OpenGov, Inc., 24-2-15636-4 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations) (pending final approval);
  • Abrego Olea v. Vessel WA Operations, LLC, No. 22-2-06944-9 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for non-compete violations);
  • Atkinson v. AJP Enterprises, LLC, 23-2-10313-1 (seeking payments for two classes for EPOA violations: pay transparency and requesting salary history) (pending final approval);
  • Atkinson v. AMF Bowling Centers, Inc., No. 23-2-19816-6 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
  • Atkinson v. Burberry Ltd., 23-2-19460-8 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
  • Atkinson v. Sonesta International Hotels Corp., No. 23-2-19802-6 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
  • Brinkman v. Emanuel, Inc., No. 24-2-02186-8 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks and minimum wage violations);
  • Carlson v. Pacific Northwest Fondue, LLC, No. 19-2-05401-8 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks);
  • Clopp v. Pacific Market Research, LLC, No. 21-2-08738-4 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class in a data breach action);
  • Cottington v. Washington Traffic Control, LLC, No. 22-2-02152-7 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for minimum wage violations);
  • David v. Freedom Vans, LLC, 4 Wn.3d 242 (2025) (reversed Trial Court’s ruling restricting the use of non-competition agreements in favor of Washington workers)
  • Davis v. Jeff, Pat, Chris LLC, No. 19-2-33832-6 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for minimum wage violations);
  • Dozier v. Noble Food Group, Inc., No. 19-2-01148-29 (Skagit Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for minimum wage violations);
  • Dykstra v. The Shield Co. Management, Inc., No. 23-2-24015-4 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for wage theft and missed meals and breaks) (pending final approval);
  • Evans v. Jacobs Solutions, Inc., No. 24-2-14584-2 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for wage theft/failure to payout paid-time-off);
  • Floyd v. DoorDash, Inc., No. 23-2-19559-1 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
  • Garcia v. WA Department of Licensing, et al., No. 22-2-05635-5 SEA (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to class in a data breach action);
  • Gegax v. Ann / Judith In Home Caregivers of Western Washington, LLC, No. 22-2-17728-4 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for non-compete violations);
  • Grove v. Cressy Door Company, Inc., No. 21-2-09828-9 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks and travel time);
  • Heard v. Home Express Delivery Service, LLC, No. 20-2-07098-0 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed overtime wages);
  • Herold v. Orchard Foods Corp., No. 23-2-19448-9 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations) (pending final approval);
  • Honc v. Pacific Pie, Inc., No. 21-2-02653-32 (Spokane Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for minimum wage violations);
  • Jens v. Tori Belle Cosmetics, LLC, No. 22-2-06641-5 (King County Super. Ct.) (obtained $9,889,985.51 judgment for non-compete violations);
  • Jones v. eFinancial, LLC, No. 22-2-19385-9 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for non-compete violations);
  • Justice v. Lube Development, L. C., No. 23-2-12593-2 (King County Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks and minimum wage violations);
  • Kennedy v. Ginsing, LLC, No. 20-2-05287-6 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks);
  • LaCombe v. USNR, LLC, No. 23-2-03036-2 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for time-clock rounding violations);
  • Moliga v. Ambrosia QSR Burger, LLC, No. 24-2-13001-2 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations) (pending final approval);
  • Moliga v. Ginsing, LLC, No. 23-2-13231-5 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
  • Moliga v. Marriott International, Inc., No. 23-2-19493-4 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
  • Moliga v. Qdoba Restaurant Corp., 23-2-11540-6 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
  • Moliga v. Vessel WA Operations, LLC, No. 21-2-09027-0 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks);
  • Morey v. Aftermath Services, LLC, 2:21-cv-00885 (W.D. Wash.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks and minimum wage violations);
  • Morey v. Suburban Propane, L.P., No. 23-2-19553-1 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations) (pending final approval);
  • Morrow v. Maverick Washington, LLC, 22-2-03653-2 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks and minimum wage violations);
  • Nunley v. Chelan-Douglas Health Dist., No 39571-5-III, 2024 Wash. App. LEXIS 2196 (October 31, 2024) (secured payments to the class in a data breach action);
  • Nyannor v. Vessel WA Operations, LLC, No. 22-2-08233-0 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for violations of the Seattle Secure Scheduling Ordinance);
  • Perry v. AWP, Inc., No. 24-2-12752-6 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations) (pending final approval);
  • Saraceno-Oliveri v. Solgen Power, LLC, No. 23-2-09228-7 King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for non-compete violations);
  • Schneider v. Assurance IQ, LLC, No. 22-2-15633-3 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for non-compete violations);
  • Shipman v. Airport Investment Company, Inc., No. 19-2-32386-8 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for minimum wage violations);
  • Spencer v. City of Mount Vernon, No. 22-2-00461-29 (Skagit Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violation);
  • Spencer v. Conifer Revenue Cycle Solutions, LLC, 23-2-19345-8 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
  • Spencer v. JELD-WEN, Inc., No. 23-2-19581-7 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations) (pending final approval);
  • Spencer v. Mastercard International, Inc., 23-2-19564-7 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
  • Viveros v. Perfect Blend, LLC, No. 23-2-05511-0 (King County Super. Ct.) (secured payments to two classes for EPOA and MWA violations);
  • Spencer v. Providence St. Joseph Health Foundation, No. 24-28211-4 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations) (pending final approval);
  • Taylor v. RACOM Corp., 24-2-08410-0 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for non-compete violations) (pending final approval);
  • Viveros v. Perfect Blend, LLC, No. 23-2-05511-0 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to two classes for EPOA and MWA violations);
  • Voivod v. APIZZA, LLC, 23-2-06729-1 (King Cnty. Super Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks);
  • Warren v. Discount Tire Co. of Washington, Inc., No. 22-2-10618-8 (Pierce Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for missed meals and breaks and minimum wage violations);
  • Yount v. Cintas Corp., No. 23-2-19408-0 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
  • Yount v. Diamond Parking, Inc., No. 23-2-19309-1 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
  • Yount v. Northwest Restaurants, Inc., No. 23-2-19399-7 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations);
  • Yount v. Sharp Elec. Corp., No. 23-2-19425-0 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations); and
  • Yount v. Williams Sonoma, No. 24-2-06599-7 (King Cnty. Super. Ct.) (secured payments to the class for EPOA violations).

Recent Individual Representations

  • Confidential six-figure resolution for wrongful termination
  • $225,000 for sexual harassment pretrial resolution
  • $79,500 for unpaid overtime
  • $965,000 confidential resolution for race discrimination and wage withholding
  • $825,000 confidential resolution for employment law violations
  • $1.5MM confidential resolution for gender discrimination
  • $250,000 for hostile work environment
  • $550,000 settlement (settled on individual basis) for withheld pay from several dozen hourly workers
  • $517,000 for wrongful termination and age discrimination
  • $150,000 plus an additional estimated $300,000 in equity for wrongful termination and breach of contract
  • Multiple resolutions for Washington Amazon employees
  • Six-figure confidential resolution for wrongfully terminated med-tech sales worker
  • Six-figure confidential resolution for worker’s sexual harassment claim
  • Six-figure confidential settlement for discrimination claim

Recent Press

  • Law360: Wash. Justices Endorse Broad View Of Pay Transparency Law
  • Law360: Home Depot Faces Suit Over Worker Moonlighting Ban
  • Law360: American Airlines Pushed Assault Victim Out, Suit Says
  • The Columbian: Residents File Class-Action Lawsuits Against Clark County Over 2023 Data Breach
  • Law360: Lineage Bank Denies Duty In $85M Fintech Collapse Suit
  • Law360: ZoomInfo Accused Of Illegally Selling Cellphone Numbers
  • The News Tribune: Cyberattack Exposed 155K People’s Data at a Pierce County College. District to Pay $1.2M
  • Seattle Times: Pay Transparency: ‘Stop Breaking the Law’
  • Seattle Times: WA Pay Transparency Lawsuits Spark ‘Cottage Industry’ Claims
  • Law360.com: Wash. Justices Wary Of Pay Transparency Law Stances
  • Law360.com: 3 Firms Seek To Co-Lead Suits Over Banks’ Synapse Ties
  • Law360.com: Mercedes-Benz Defective Brake Suit Narrowed Again
  • Law360.com: Wash. Justices Back Workers’ View On Moonlighting Law
  • Law360.com: Customers Sue Fintech Partner Banks After Processor Failure
  • Law360.com: Delta Pay Range Suit to Wait for Wash. Justices’ Clarity
  • Law360.com: HP Applicant Gets Pay Posting Suit Sent Back to State Court
  • GeekWire: New Class Action Lawsuits Target Amazon Over Non-competes and Pay Transparency
  • Seattle Times: Amazon Accused of Violating WA’s Ban on Noncompete Agreements
  • Law360.com: Siemens Accused of Violating Wash. Pay Transparency Law
  • Law360.com: T-Mobile Doesn’t Pay Technicians Proper OT, Suit Says
  • Law360.com: Retailer Says No Good Faith In Worker’s Wash. Pay Range Suit
  • Law360.com: Taco Bell Franchisee Will Pay $2M to End Job-Posting Suits
  • Law360.com: HP Moves Washington Pay Transparency Suit to US Court
  • Law360.com: Job Hopeful’s Lack of Injury Sinks Wash. Pay Disclosure Suit
  • Law360.com: Appeal of Wash. Pay Range Suit Remand Gets Shut Down
  • Law360.com: Wash. Job Applicant’s Pay Transparency Suit Tossed for Now
  • Law360.com: Staffing Agency Escapes Applicant’s Salary Disclosure Suit
  • Law360.com: Wash. Pay Range Suits Meet Early Crossroads on Standing
  • Law360.com: Wash. Solar Co. Will Pay $465K To End Noncompete Suit
  • Law360.com: Parking Co. Strikes $1.4M Deal To End Pay Transparency Suit
  • JD Supra: Emery Reddy Files 31 Pay Transparency Lawsuits in Washington
  • Law.com: Companies Hit with Class Actions Over Alleged Violations of Equal Pay Act
  • Law360.com: Spate of Pay Range Suits Has Wash. Employers ‘Freaking Out’
  • Tacoma News Tribune: Virginia Mason Franciscan Health Sued for Patient Data Breach
  • Seattle Times: Barrage of Lawsuits Against Fred Hutch Arrives After Recent Data Leak
  • Fox 13: Minimum Wage, Cannabis Use, Waiting Period for Guns: New Laws Going into Effect in Washington in 2024
  • Bloomberg.com: Adidas, Home Depot Sued in Test Cases on Job Ad Pay Transparency
  • The News Tribune: Pierce College cyberattack exposed 155,000 people’s data. Is the district at fault?
  • GovernmentTecnology.com: Pierce College Sued in Wake of Cyber Attack
  • CNBC.com: Some Companies Lower Salaries in Job Postings as Pay Transparency Laws Take Effect, New Report Finds
  • Seattle Times: Emery | Reddy, PLLC Files 31 Lawsuits for EPOA Violations Since June
  • Seattle Times: Employee Suit Claims Seattle Melting Pot Owner Pocketed Minimum Wage Surcharge and Shortchanged Workers
  • DailyBeast.com: How Amazon Stacks the Deck Against Workers Fighting to Keep Their Jobs
  • Seattle Times: So Far, Washington Workers Pushed Out Over Vaccine Mandates Aren’t Losing Jobless Benefits
  • ADN.com: Some City of Seattle Workers are Ready to Quit Rather than Return to the Office
  • Seattle Times: Some City of Seattle Workers Ready to Quit Rather than Return to Office
  • Everett Community College: EvCC Pays $150,000 to Settle Terminated Employee’s Lawsuit
  • KIRO7: Could Employers Require Workers to Get the COVID-19 Vaccine?
  • Heraldnet.com: After Cop’s Suicide, Everett Picked ‘Money Over the People,’ Family Says