The California Supreme Court decision in Kirby v. Immoos Fire Protection, Inc. (2012) 53 Cal.4th 1244, 274 P.3d 1160 held that Section 218.5 is a two-way fee-shifting provision and does not apply to claims to recover additional wages for the […]
The California Supreme Court decision in Kirby v. Immoos Fire Protection, Inc. (2012) 53 Cal.4th 1244, 274 P.3d 1160 held that Section 218.5 is a two-way fee-shifting provision and does not apply to claims to recover additional wages for the […]
Heyen v. Safeway Inc. (2013) 216 Cal.App.4th 795, 157 Cal.Rptr.3d 280 Plaintiff/Respondent Linda Heyen, was an assistant manager for defendant’s store. After Defendant terminated Heyen, she claimed unpaid overtime pay, contending misclassification as an exempt employee even though most of […]
An overview of Muldrow v. Surrex Solutions Corp. (2012) 146 Cal.Rptr.3d 447, 12 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 998; Hernandez v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. (2012) 146 Cal.Rptr.3d 424, 12 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10 (as modified Sept. 25, 2012) and In […]
Kirby v. Immoos Fire Protection, Inc. (2012) 53 Cal.4th 1244, 274 P.3d 1160 Background and Court History: Plaintiffs Anthony Kirby and Rick Leech, Jr., sued defendant Immoos Fire Protection, Inc. (IFP) and multiple Doe defendants for violating various labor laws […]
Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court (2012) 53 Cal.4th 1004, 273 P.3d 513 Background: Hourly nonexempt employees filed a class action lawsuit against Defendant employer Brinker which owns and operates several restaurants throughout California. A class of just under 60,000 […]
Thurman v. Bayshore Transit Management, Inc. 203 Cal.App.4th 1112, 138 Cal.Rptr.3d 130 Background: In January 2004, Amalgamated Transit Union, filed a representative action on behalf of its member bus drivers who worked in and around National City, California, alleging that […]
Esquivel et al. v. Vistar Corp. et al. Not Reported in F.Supp.2d, 2012 WL 516094 (C.D.Cal.) Background: Plaintiffs were employed as route delivery drivers. Plaintiffs brought a class action against employer alleging that, throughout their employment, Defendant scheduled their delivery […]