Source: https://molly-novasel-ki8h.squarespace.com/norm-blumenthal/
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 18:25:19+00:00

Document:
Norman B. Blumenthal is a class action lawyer/attorney for Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik De Blouw LLP. He has been defending employees for over 30 years.
Norman was born in Washington D.C. He received his BA degree from the University of Wisconsin in 1970 and his J.D. degree from Loyola University of Chicago in 1973. He was admitted to the bar in Illinois in 1973 and in California in 1976.
Norman grew up in the Washington D.C. area and graduated from Bethesda Chevy-Chase High School in 1966. While living in the Washington area he workeddelivering the Washington Post until leaving in 1966 for Madison, Wisconsin. While in Madison he took part in the Vietnam war protests. He went to Chicago in 1970 and attended law school first at night while working during the day as a substitute teacher in the Chicago Public School system, and on the weekends as a librarian at the law school. During the summer of 1971 he did volunteer work for the Harvard Voluntary Defenders in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and was hired by the Legal Defense Fund that summer to help write the appendix to the brief to be submitted to the United States Supreme Court in Furman v. Georgia supporting the proposition that there is no deterrent effect by reason of the death penalty as evidenced by the homicide rate in foreign countries that do not have the death penalty.
After graduation from law school in 1973, Norman went to work as a law clerk for Illinois Supreme Court Chief Justice Thomas J. Moran while serving on the Illinois Court of Appeals. In 1975, after completing his two year clerkship with Justice Moran and spending three months in Europe and Israel with his wife, Diane, they moved to La Jolla, California. After passing the California bar in 1976, Norman spent the next 12 years as Chief Operating Officer and General Counsel to an Oil & Gas Exploration Company and taught Oil & Gas law at the University of San Diego School of Law and California Western School of Law.
In 1988, Norman went into private practice. Between 1988 and the present Norman’s practice has focused on the protection of employees, consumers, and securities buyers from unfair, illegal and deceptive business practices through the filing of consumer, employment and securities class action and individual cases. He has obtained over $1.3 billion in settlements for his clients. He still lives in La Jolla with his wife, Diane, where his two sons and three grandsons also reside. He has also provided pro bono legal services for local civic, educational and religious organizations from time to time while in private practice.
Sakkab v. Luxottica Retail N. Am., Inc., 803 F.3d 425, (9th Cir. 2015); Securitas Security Services USA, Inc. v. Superior Court, 234 Cal. App. 4th 1109,(Cal. Feb. 27, 2015); Sussex v. United States Dist. Court for the Dist. of Nev., 781 F.3d 1065 (9thCir. 2015); In re Tobacco Cases II, 41 Cal. 4th 1257 (2007); Washington Mutual Bank v. Superior Court, 24 Cal. 4th 906 (2001); Rocker v. KPMG LLP, 148 P.3d 703; 122 Nev. 1185 (2006); PCO, Inc. v. Christensen, Miller, Fink, Jacobs, Glaser, Weil & Shapiro, LLP, 150 Cal. App. 4th 384 (2007); Hall v. County of Los Angeles, 148 Cal. App. 4th 318 (2007); Coshow v. City of Escondido, 132 Cal. App. 4th 687 (2005);Daniels v. Philip Morris, 18 F.Supp 2d 1110 (S.D. Cal.1998); Gibson v. World Savings & Loan Asso., 103 Cal. App. 4th 1291 (2003); Jordan v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 75 Cal. App. 4th 445 (1999); Jordan v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 100 Cal.App. 4th 431 (2002); Norwest Mortgage, Inc. v. Superior Court, 72 Cal.App.4th 214 (1999); Hildago v. Diversified Transp. Sya, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 3207 (9th Cir. 1998); Kensington Capital Mgal. v. Oakley, Inc., 1999 U.S. Dist LEXIS 385; Fed.Sec.L.Rep. (CCH) P90, 411 (1999 C.D. Cal.); Lister v. Oakley, Inc., 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 384; Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) P90,409 (C.D Cal. 1999); Olszewski v. Scripps Health, 30 Cal. 4th 798 (2003); Steroid Hormone Product Cases, 181 Cal. App. 4th 145 (2010); Owen v. Macy's, Inc., 175 Cal. App. 4th 462 (2009); Taiheiyo Cement Corp. v. Superior Court, 117 Cal. App. 4th 380 (2004); Taiheiyo Cement Corp. v. Superior Court, 105 Cal.App. 4th 398 (2003); McMeans v. Scripps Health, Inc., 100 Cal. App. 4th 507 (2002); Ramos v. Countrywide Home Loans, 82 Cal.App. 4th 615 (2000); Tevssier v. City of San Diego, 81 Cal.App. 4th 685 (2000);Washington Mutual Bank v. Superior Court, 70 Cal. App. 4th 299 (1999); Silvas v. E*Trade Mortg. Corp., 514 F.3d 1001 (9th Cir. 2008); Silvas v. E*Trade Mortg. Corp., 421 F. Supp. 2d 1315 (S.D. Cal. 2006); McPhail v. First Command Fin. Planning, Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26544 (S.D. Cal. 2009); McPhail v. First Command Fin. Planning, Inc., 251 F.R.D. 514 (S.D. Cal. 2008); McPhail v. First Command Fin. Planning, Inc., 247 F.R.D. 598 (S.D. Cal. 2007); Barcia v. Contain-A-Way, Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17118 (S.D. Cal. 2009); Barcia v. Contain-A-Way, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27365 (S.D. Cal. 2008); Wise v. Cubic Def. Applications, Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11225 (S.D. Cal. 2009); Gabisan v. Pelican Prods., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1391 (S.D. Cal. 2009); La Jolla Friends of the Seals v. Nat'l Oceanic & Atmospheric Admin. Nat'l Marine Fisheries Serv., 630 F. Supp. 2d 1222 (S.D. Cal. 2009); La Jolla Friends of the Seals v. Nat'l Oceanic & Atmospheric Admin. Nat'l Marine Fisheries Serv., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102380 (S.D. Cal. 2008); Louie v. Kaiser Found. Health Plan, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78314 (S.D. Cal. 2008); Weltman v. Ortho Mattress, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20521 (S.D. Cal. 2010); Weltman v. Ortho Mattress, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60344 (S.D. Cal. 2008); Curry v. CTB McGraw-Hill, LLC, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5920; 97 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1888; 37 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2390 (N.D. Cal. 2006); Reynov v. ADP Claims Servs. Group, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94332 (N.D. Cal. 2006); Kennedy v. Natural Balance Pet Foods, Inc., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 248 (9th Cir. 2010); Kennedy v. Natural Balance Pet Foods, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38889 (S.D. Cal. 2008); Kennedy v. Natural Balance Pet Foods, Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57766 (S.D. Cal. 2007); Sussex v. Turnberry/MGM Grand Towers, LLC, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29503 (D. Nev. 2009); Picus v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 256 F.R.D. 651 (D. Nev. 2009); Tull v. Stewart Title of Cal., Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14171 (S.D. Cal. 2009); Keshishzadeh v. Gallagher, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46805 (S.D. Cal. 2010); Keshishzadeh v. Arthur J. Gallagher Serv. Co., 2010 U.S. Dist. Lexis 116380 (S.D. Cal. 2010); In re Pet Food Prods. Liab. Litig., MDL Docket No. 1850 (All Cases), 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94603 (D.N.J. 2008); In re Pet Food Prods. Liab. Litig., 629 F.3d 333 (3rd. Cir. 2010); Puentes v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc., 160 Cal. App. 4th 638 (2008); Rezec v. Sony Pictures Entertainment, Inc., 116 Cal. App. 4th 135 (2004); Badillo v. Am. Tobacco Co., 202 F.R.D. 261 (D. Nev. 2001); La Jolla Friends of the Seals v. Nat’l Oceanic & Atmospheric Admin., 2010 U.S. App. Lexis 23025 (9th Cir. 2010); Dirienzo v. Dunbar Armored, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. Lexis 36650 (S.D. Cal. 2011); Rix v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 2011 U.S. Dist Lexis 25422 (S.D. Cal. 2011); Weitzke v. Costar Realty Info., Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist Lexis 20605 (S.D. Cal. 2011); Goodman v. Platinum Condo. Dev., LLC, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36044 (D. Nev. 2011); Sussex v. Turnberry/MGM Grand Towers, LLC, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14502 (D. Nev 2011);Smith v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. Lexis 117869 (S.D. Cal. 2010).
Norman is a California class action pioneer. For over two decades, he has been representing employees and consumers in California in class action lawsuits for the purpose of handling the next great case to champion justice in a world where business at the extremes takes unfair advantage of employees and consumers. In total, Norman has obtained over $1.3 Billion on behalf of employees and consumers. More importantly, he has ushered in good public policy for the benefit of all Californians everywhere.
As a result of Jordan v. Cal. DMV, on June 8, 2000, the California Governor signed two bills passed by the Legislature, which found and declared that approximately 1,700,000 vehicle owners paid a an unconstitutional smog impact fee imposed by California on out of state vehicles. This amounted to a $500 million in unconstitutional smog impact fees imposed on drivers. After interest, Norman helped settle this case for over $650 million dollars. Norman enabled over 1.7 million people get refunds for a smog impact fee that was unconstitutional.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.