Lennar Title $43.5M Overtime Judgment Reversed After 19 Years, Were You an Affected Worker? Cortina et al. v. North American Title Company, No. F085389

A California appellate court tossed a $43.5 million judgment against a California title company on May 29, 2026 — closing one chapter in a case that has been running since April 2007, spanning nineteen years. The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed the judgment in Cortina et al. v. North American Title Company — the company now operating as Lennar Title, Inc. — and sent the case back to trial court for individual proceedings. The original complaint was filed 19 years ago, and the court described the case as even rarer and more unwieldy than a prior landmark wage action it measured it against.

Lennar Title Overtime Wage Judgment Reversal — Key Facts

Field	Detail
Lawsuit Filed	April 2007
Court	Fifth District Court of Appeal, California
Trial Court	Fresno County Superior Court, Case No. 07CECG01169
Appellate Case No.	F085389
Decision Date	May 29, 2026
Defendant	North American Title Company (now Lennar Title, Inc.)
Plaintiffs	~700 current and former employees in two classes
Judgment Reversed	$43,547,946
Specific Law Alleged	California overtime and meal break laws; Business and Professions Code § 17200 (UCL)
Grounds for Reversal	Unauthorized nonconsensual referee appointment; scientifically invalid sampling at trial
Current Court Stage	Remanded for retrial of named plaintiffs’ individual claims; new class certification motion permitted
Settlement Status	None — no settlement exists
Last Updated	June 3, 2026

Who Is Lennar Title and Why Did 700 Employees Sue for Overtime?

During the class period from April 17, 2003, through December 31, 2012, North American Title Company — now known as Lennar Title, Inc. — employed several hundred people as escrow officers and in other escrow-related positions across more than 80 offices in 23 counties throughout California. Escrow officers manage real estate closings, handling funds, title documents, loan packages, and compliance requirements. The company classified many of these workers as exempt from overtime — meaning no extra pay for hours worked beyond eight in a day or 40 in a week.

Roughly 700 current and former employees sued. One group said the company wrongly classified them as exempt from overtime law. A second said they were pushed to work without recording their hours. The case grew into one of the largest and longest-running wage-and-hour class actions in California history.

What Did North American Title Company Allegedly Do to Its Escrow Workers Between 2003 and 2012?

The Exempt class alleged entitlement to overtime compensation and meal breaks and rest periods, which they did not receive — based on North American Title Company’s alleged misclassification of them as exempt employees when, according to their allegations, they were in fact nonexempt.

Misclassification sits at the center of the case. In California, some managerial and administrative employees can be exempt from overtime — but only if they spend more than half their time on genuinely exempt work. A worker splitting time 49–51 between managerial and regular duties does not make the cut.

The Nonexempt class alleged NATC had policies and practices prohibiting them from reporting overtime on their timesheets and pressuring them not to report overtime or to underreport overtime, and requiring or pressuring them to skip meal breaks and rest periods — in other words, policies or practices requiring class members to work “off the clock.”

For broader context on how California overtime misclassification cases unfold and how workers pursue compensation in similar disputes, see the coverage of how California’s overtime misclassification rules played out in a similar TQL overtime class action on AllAboutLawyer.com. For the full list of active employment class action lawsuits, see the latest employment class action lawsuits on AllAboutLawyer.com.

If you worked as an escrow officer, Unit Manager, Branch Manager, Advisory Escrow Officer, or Escrow Operations Manager for North American Title Company in California between April 17, 2003, and December 31, 2012, this case may directly affect you.

Are You Part of the North American Title Overtime Class Action?

The wage and hour claims of approximately 700 plaintiffs were divided into two classes based on whether they had been designated as exempt or nonexempt employees.

You were likely in the Exempt class if:

• You worked in one of these roles at North American Title Company in California between 2003 and 2012: Escrow Officer (2003), Senior Escrow Officer, Special Projects Escrow Officer, Escrow Supervisor, Advisory Escrow Officer, Escrow Unit Manager, Escrow Manager, Branch Manager, or Escrow Operations Manager
• The company classified you as salaried exempt and did not pay you overtime

You were likely in the Nonexempt class if:

• You worked as a Junior Escrow Officer, Escrow Officer, Senior Escrow Officer, Special Projects Escrow Officer, or Escrow Supervisor and were classified as hourly
• You were pressured not to record overtime hours or required to skip meal breaks

Escrow Workers Outside Fresno County — Does This Case Cover You?

The class period covered employees working in over 80 offices located in 23 counties throughout California. This was a statewide California class action — your county of employment did not affect whether you were included. If you worked for North American Title Company anywhere in California during the class period, the case was intended to cover you.

If you are unsure whether you are part of the North American Title Company overtime class action, a free consultation with an employment discrimination attorney can help you assess your situation and what options remain now that the judgment has been reversed.

Related article: $2.67B Blue Cross Blue Shield Antitrust Settlement, Are Your Payments Coming? — In re, Blue Cross Blue Shield Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 2406

What Are Affected North American Title Workers Asking the Court to Award?

The trial court entered a judgment calculated at $43,547,946 — with prejudgment interest making up more than half of that figure. That judgment has now been reversed in full.

What Could Former North American Title Employees Receive After the Reversal?

No money is available right now. No claim form exists. The reversal means the $43.5 million judgment no longer stands, and the case has been sent back to the Fresno County Superior Court for individual retrial of the named plaintiffs’ claims. The trial court is free to entertain a new certification motion on remand as to the Exempt class, but if it decides to proceed with a class action it must apply the guidelines set out by the appeals court.

What former workers could ultimately recover depends entirely on whether class certification is granted again, how many class members can establish individual claims, and what those trials produce — a process that could take years. Any employee who believes they are owed unpaid overtime from this employer should consult an employment discrimination attorney to understand what individual claim options remain.

What Should Former North American Title Escrow Workers Do Right Now?

No class notice will be sent because there is no approved settlement or active claim process. Here is what affected workers can do today.

1. You are not automatically receiving money. The judgment was reversed. If you were a class member, your rights have not been resolved. You have not been paid and have not given up your claims unless you opt out — there is nothing to opt out of at this stage.
   
2. Preserve any employment records you still have. Save pay stubs, offer letters, time records, performance reviews, and any communications about hours worked or overtime policies. The class period was April 17, 2003, through December 31, 2012, so many of these records may be held only by the company, but anything you can access is valuable.
   
3. Consult an attorney about individual claims. With class certification reversed for the Exempt class, individual former employees may be able to pursue their own wage claims depending on applicable statutes of limitations and tolling rules under California law. An employment attorney can assess this quickly in a free consultation.
   
4. Monitor the case docket. The case is identified as Cortina et al. v. North American Title Company, Fresno County Superior Court, Case No. 07CECG01169. Docket activity will be posted through the California Courts public access system.
   
5. Watch for a new class certification motion. Plaintiffs’ counsel may file a new motion to certify the Exempt class under the corrected framework. If a new class is certified and a settlement is eventually reached, a claims process will follow.

Why the $43.5 Million Judgment Was Thrown Out — The Two Fatal Errors

The Unauthorized Referee — A First in California

After the conclusion of the first phase of trial, the trial court appointed a referee to conduct the second phase without the parties’ consent and over defendant’s strenuous objections. The reference proceedings lasted years and included live testimony from over 230 class members, all leading to the entry of a $43 million judgment.

A nonconsensual reference of the scope and magnitude ordered in this case is not merely a rare occurrence — it appears unprecedented in California jurisprudence. A trial court’s authority to delegate matters to a referee without the parties’ consent is strictly circumscribed by the California Constitution and Code of Civil Procedure. The reference proceedings below were entirely unauthorized, and this error alone compelled reversal of the judgment.

The Flawed Sampling Methodology

Plaintiffs had leaned on testimony from about 24 of some 156 Branch Managers — roughly 15 percent — to stand in for the entire group. The appeals court called that scientifically invalid: a valid extrapolation model requires expert input to determine the appropriate sample size and margin of error, and the sample group of witnesses must be randomly selected. None of those requirements were met.

The lesson for employers is blunt: exempt status depends on what people actually do, not their titles. A sprawling class with many roles across many offices over a decade is hard to try as a single unit, and judges must decertify when the trial plan breaks down.

North American Title Overtime Lawsuit Timeline

Milestone	Date
Class period begins	April 17, 2003
Original complaint filed by Carolyn Cortina	April 2007
Two classes certified	2010
Trial begins	September 2015
Nonexempt class decertified; Exempt class liability phase concluded	2016
Trial court appoints referee (nonconsensually) for Phase 2	Post-2016
Phase 2 reference proceedings conducted; 230+ class members testify	Multi-year
$43,547,946 judgment entered by trial court	2022
California Supreme Court rules on judicial disqualification question	2024
Fifth District Court of Appeal reverses judgment	May 29, 2026
Remand for individual retrial and possible new class certification	TBD
Expected resolution	TBD — pending remand proceedings

Lennar Title Overtime Lawsuit — Frequently Asked Questions, No. F085389

Is there a class action lawsuit against Lennar Title (formerly North American Title Company) for overtime misclassification right now?

Yes. The case, Cortina et al. v. North American Title Company (now Lennar Title, Inc.), Case No. 07CECG01169, has been pending in Fresno County Superior Court since April 2007. The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed the $43.5 million judgment on May 29, 2026, and sent the case back for retrial.

Do I need to do anything right now to be included in the North American Title overtime class action?

No immediate action is required to preserve your position as a potential class member. However, no claim form exists and no money is available. The cause has been remanded for retrial of the named plaintiffs’ individual claims, with the trial court free to entertain a new certification motion on remand. Consulting an employment attorney now is the most useful step you can take.

When will the North American Title overtime case settle?

There is no settlement and no timeline for one. The case must first go through individual retrial and a potential new class certification process in Fresno County Superior Court. Cases of this complexity typically take years to resolve after remand.

Can I file my own lawsuit against Lennar Title for overtime instead of joining the class?

Possibly. Whether an individual California wage claim remains viable depends on statutes of limitations, tolling from the class action, and the specific facts of your employment. An employment attorney can assess this quickly. Do not assume your window has closed — tolling rules in California can preserve individual claims even after long litigation.

What specific law does North American Title allegedly violate?

The plaintiffs proceeded at trial solely on a claim under Business and Professions Code section 17200 — California’s unfair competition law — after dismissing their underlying statutory Labor Code causes of action. The underlying conduct alleged was failure to pay overtime and provide meal and rest breaks in violation of California wage and hour law.

What does the reversal mean for former workers who were class members?

The reversal means the $43.5 million judgment is wiped out and no payments will be made based on that verdict. It does not mean Lennar Title has been found innocent — the appeals court reversed on procedural and evidentiary grounds, not on the merits of whether the workers were actually misclassified.

How much could former North American Title employees receive from a future settlement?

There is no way to predict. Recoveries in a potential future settlement will depend on the strength of the evidence presented, the size of any re-certified class, how many class members participate, and what the parties negotiate. No money is available yet and no claim form exists. Speak with an employment discrimination attorney to understand what your individual claim may be worth.

Sources Used in This Lennar Title Overtime Reversal Article

Fifth District Court of Appeal — Cortina et al. v. North American Title Company, No. F085389, filed May 29, 2026: https://www4.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/F085389.PDF

California Courts — Published Opinion Summary, No. F085389: https://courts.ca.gov/opinion/published/2026-05-29/f085389

HRD America — “Court tosses $43.5 million judgment in overtime misclassification class action,” June 1, 2026: https://www.hcamag.com/us/specialization/employment-law/court-tosses-435-million-judgment-in-overtime-misclassification-class-action/577301

Prepared by the AllAboutLawyer.com Editorial Team and reviewed for factual accuracy against the Fifth District Court of Appeal opinion No. F085389 and Fresno County Superior Court records for Case No. 07CECG01169 on June 3, 2026. Last Updated: June 3, 2026

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws vary by state and individual circumstances differ. For advice about your specific situation, consult a qualified attorney.