We have not found any instances of professional misconduct for this lawyer.
Alexei Kuchinsky is an attorney who specializes in Employment Law. The Kuchinsky Law Office represents both employees and employers providing counsel and litigation services. Mr. Kuchinsky is committed to representing employees of all professions, in all industries, and at different employment levels. He has the knowledge, skills, and experience to take on employers of different sizes. Whether it is a small local business or a national corporation, he has a proven track record of getting employees the fairness they deserve.
Resolution of Employment Disputes in Court
Mr. Kuchinsky works closely with clients to develop an effective legal strategy that meets each client’s goal and budget. Mr. Kuchinsky’s litigation work includes the initial client interview, investigation, legal research, discovery, motions, hearings, alternative dispute resolutions, and trial. Mr. Kuchinsky is dedicated to providing superior legal representation services.
Employment Compliance and Counseling
In addition to litigation, Mr. Kuchinsky regularly counsels San Francisco employers on a variety of employment law issues such as reductions in force, severance settlements, employee handbooks, personnel policies, and internal investigations. Mr. Kuchinsky provides employers with comprehensive compliance solutions designed to identify and address employment law problems before a lawsuit or administrative claim is filed, ensuring employers maintain maximum flexibility to resolve issues without disruption to business operations.
Throughout his carrier, Mr. Kuchinsky has handled over one hundred and fifty employment cases, including multi-plaintiff, class, and representative actions. His knowledge of the applicable wage-and-hour laws is evidenced by his representation of thousands of employees, as well as numerous employers, in litigation in California and federal courts.
For example, Mr. Kuchinsky has been appointed and finally approved as class and PAGA counsel in the following cases:
Mobile Examiners vs. National Health Company, No. 17CVxxxxxx (Cal. Super. Ct., Cty. of Santa Clara, Jan. 2020) (a Class and PAGA action on behalf of 454 mobile examiners for failure to pay wages);
Military Role Players v. Government Contractor, 3:18-cv-xxxxx (S.D. Cal. Aug. 20, 2019) (class counsel in a collective FLSA and class action on behalf of 450 employees for failure to pay wages);
Military Role Players v. Government Contractors and Subcontractor, No. 5:14-CV-xxxxx (C.D. Cal. Aug. 22, 2017) (class counsel in a class action on behalf of 1,930 employees for failure to pay wages);
Military Role Players v. Government Contractor, No. 5:16-cv-xxxxx, (C.D. Cal. Oct. 12, 2017) (class counsel in a collective FLSA and class action for failure to pay wages on behalf of 190 employees);
Mobile Examiner v. National Health Company, No. RGxxxxxxxx (Cal. Super. Ct., Cty. of Alameda, Feb. 2018) (a representative PAGA action on behalf of 100 mobile examiners for failure to pay wages);
Deliver Driver v. National Online Retailer, No. RGxxxxxxxx (Cal. Super. Ct., Cty. of Alameda, May 2018) (a representative PAGA action on behalf of 64 delivery drivers for failure to pay wages); and
Front-of-House Employee v. SF Restaurant, No. CGC-14-xxxxxx (Cal. Super. Ct., Cty. of San Francisco, July 2015) (a representative PAGA action on behalf of 180 restaurant workers).
Mr. Kuchinsky’s litigation experience extends to trials. He has successfully prosecuted and defended the following employment cases:
Massage Therapist v. SF Massage Salon, CGC-16-xxxxxx, (Cal. Super. Ct., Cty. of San Francisco, Feb. 2014). Obtained a judgment through a bench trial in favor of his client massage therapist against all defendants, including one corporate and two individual defendants. The Court found that the defendants unlawfully misclassified Mr. Kuchinsky’s client as an independent contractor and unlawfully terminated her for complaining about Defendant’s unlawful deductions. The Court also found that the defendants failed to pay her overtime, premiums for missed meal and rest periods, and failed to provide accurate wage statements. When Defendants filed an appeal, Mr. Kuchinsky obtained a dismissal of the defendants’ appeal as untimely.
Plumber v. SF Plumbing Company. CGC-12-xxxxxx, (Cal. Super. Ct., Cty. of San Francisco, Feb. 2014). Obtained a judgment through a bench trial in favor of an individual defendant, who was sued personally for the Labor Code violations committed by the corporation he owned and operated. This was a wage-and-hour trial and Mr. Kuchinsky was a second chair counsel. The plaintiff claimed that he was owed unpaid overtime, the minimum wage for standby time, premiums for missed meal and rest breaks, and other related statutory penalties. The court found that despite the corporation was wholly owned and managed by the individual defendant, the employee failed to prove that the individual was an “employer” under California law; (2) that he was an alter ego of the corporation; or that (3) he was liable under “the common law theory of active participation for his own tortious conduct.