Sanders v. City of Newport, 657 F.3d 772 (2011)
Diane Sanders, a utility billing clerk for the City of Newport, Oregon, began suffering health problems, which (according to her doctor) were due to “multiple chemical sensitivity” triggered by handling low-grade paper at work and poor air quality in her work area. Sanders took an FMLA leave, but the city refused to return her to
DFEH v. Lucent Technologies, Inc., 642 F.3d 728 (2011)
The California Department of Fair Employment and Housing and Steven Carauddo alleged Lucent violated the Fair Employment and Housing Act when it terminated Carauddo’s employment as an installer because he could not lift more than 30 pounds due to a back injury. The district court granted summary judgment to Lucent, and the Ninth Circuit Court
Wills v. Superior Court, 194 Cal. App. 4th 312 (2011)
Linda Wills, who worked as a clerk for the Orange County Superior Court, was terminated from her employment after she told co-workers she was going to add them to her “Kill Bill” list and forwarded a cell phone ringtone to several people, including a co-worker, that said in a “shrieking directive”: “I’m going to
Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp., 563 U.S. ___, 131 S. Ct. 1325 (2011)
Kevin Kasten alleged that his former employer, Saint-Gobain, terminated his employment because he orally complained to Saint-Gobain about the location of its time clocks, which prevented workers from receiving credit for the time they spent putting on and taking off their work clothes (in violation of the Fair Labor Standards
Arechiga v. Dolores Press, Inc., 192 Cal. App. 4th 567 (2011)
Carlos Arechiga worked as a janitor for Dolores Press for almost seven years at which time his employment was terminated. Although Arechiga filed a complaint alleging various causes of action, only his claim for violation of the Unfair Competition Law went to trial. Arechiga, a non-exempt employee, claimed the $880 that he received
Price v. Starbucks Corp., 192 Cal. App. 4th 1136 (2011)
Drake Price worked as an entry-level Starbucks barista for approximately 13 shifts before he was fired. Following his termination, he sued Starbucks on behalf of himself and a putative class of employees seeking to recover unpaid wages, penalties and damages for Starbucks’ alleged failure to timely pay him wages upon termination, failure to pay
Heritage Residential Care, Inc. v. Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, 192 Cal. App. 4th 75 (2011)
Heritage Residential, a company that operates seven residential care facilities, employed 24 workers, 16 of whom lacked social security numbers. Heritage treated the 16 employees who did not have social security numbers as independent contractors and issued them 1099 statements rather than itemized wage statements. Following a workplace
Seymore v. Metson Marine, Inc., 194 Cal. App. 4th 361 (2011)
Plaintiffs Andrew Seymore and Kenneth Blonden were employed by Metson Marine as crew members on Metson’s offshore oil spill recovery vessels. Crew members worked 14-day rotational hitches, alternating with 14-day rest periods and were paid to work a 12-hour daily shift during the two-week period, except on crew-change days, when they worked only
Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 635 F.3d 383 (2011)
Michael Christopher and Frank Buchanan were employed as pharmaceutical sales representatives (“PSRs”) of SmithKline d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline (“Glaxo”) and were classified as outside salesmen exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act. PSRs work outside of a Glaxo office and spend much of their time traveling to the offices of and working with physicians within their assigned
Hodge v. Aon Ins. Servs., 192 Cal. App. 4th 1361 (2011)
Plaintiffs in this case are claims adjusters employed by a third party administrator (Cambridge Integrated Services Group, Inc.). Depending on the entity with which it contracts and the terms of the contract, Cambridge adjusts general liability, vehicle-related and workers’ compensation claims. In their claim alleging violation of the Unfair Competition Law, plaintiffs alleged