Home » Briefs » Christina Espinoza v. East West Bank


Econ One’s expert economists have experience across a wide variety of services including antitrust, class certification, damages, financial markets and securities, intellectual property, international arbitration, labor and employment, and valuation and financial analysis.


Econ One’s resources including blogs, cases, news, and more provide a collection of materials from Econ One’s experts.

Cases and Engagements

Get an Inside look at Economics with the experts.
Managing Director

Ph.D. in Statistics, University of California, Los Angeles

M.S. in Statistics, University of California, Los Angeles

B.A. in Mathematics/Economics, Claremont McKenna College

Econ One, August 2008 – Present

University of Pennsylvania, 2007 – 2008

University of California Los Angeles, 2007 – 2008

Self-Employed Statistical Consultant, 2004 – 2008

RAND Statistics Group, 2006

Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space, 2001 – 2003

U.S. District Court

State Court


Private Mediation

Share this Article
April 26, 2024

Christina Espinoza v. East West Bank

Christina Espinoza v. East West Bank, California Superior Court Case No. BC502166 (Los Angeles County) was a proposed wage and hour class action that was filed in 2013.  The plaintiff alleged that she and assistant branch managers were misclassified as salary-exempt employees.  Econ One and Dr. Brian Kriegler were retained by East West Bank (i) to review/analyze a sample of putative class members’ declarations and deposition transcripts, and (ii) to opine on plaintiff’s experts’ proposed statistical and surveying methodologies.

Dr. Kriegler provided his opinions via a declaration that was submitted with East West Bank’s opposition to plaintiff’s class certification motion.  Based on the analysis of said declarations and deposition transcripts, Dr. Kriegler summarized the frequency and duration of job tasks as stated by declarants/deponents.  Additionally, he concluded that some of the observed patterns and variation among these people likely would apply to eventual survey evidence and/or representative testimony, which plaintiff’s experts proposed collecting.  The trial court denied plaintiff’s motion for class certification.  Ultimately, the California Court of Appeal cited Dr. Kriegler’s declaration and affirmed the denial of class certification.

Industries: Financial Markets

Latest Related Resources and Insights