California Employment Law Notes

Subscribe to California Employment Law Notes via RSS

Baker v. American Horticulture Supply, Inc., 186 Cal. App. 4th 1059 (2010)

Edwin Baker worked as an independent wholesale sales representative for American Horticulture Supply, Inc. (“AHS”). A jury returned verdicts in Baker’s favor on his breach of contract and fraud claims, but the trial court ordered a new trial on the grounds of insufficiency of evidence, excessive damages and juror misconduct. The trial court granted AHS’s motion for directed verdict as to Baker’s statutory claim for violation of the Independent Wholesale Sales Representatives Contractual Relations Act of 1990 (Cal. Civ. Code § 1738.10, et seq.) on the ground that there was no evidence that AHS’s violation of the statute was “willful.” The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s ordering a new trial on the non-statutory claims, but reversed its dismissal of the statutory claim after concluding that “there is no evidence … the Legislature intended to immunize a nonwillful violation of the Act.”

Singh v. Southland Stone, U.S.A., Inc., 186 Cal.App.4th 338 (2010)

Gurpreet Singh moved from India to California to work as a general manager for Southland Stone. After Singh resigned and returned to India, he filed suit against Southland and its president (Ravinder S. Johar), alleging various contract and tort claims. The jury awarded Singh more than $980,000 for past and future noneconomic damages, economic damages, unpaid wages and punitive damages. The Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment in part (as to the denial of the breach of contract claim and the award of $6,800 in wages whose payment defendants conditioned upon Singh’s signing a release), but otherwise reversed the judgment. The Court reversed the judgment on the claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing (because Singh was employed at will) and the claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress (because it was barred by the exclusive remedy of the Workers’ Compensation Act) and ordered the trial court to enter judgment for defendants on those claims.

Faulkinbury v. Boyd & Assocs., Inc., 185 Cal. App. 4th 1363 (2010)

Plaintiffs sought to represent and certify a class of 4,000 current and former employees of Boyd & Associates, which provides security guard services throughout Southern California. Plaintiffs alleged that Boyd denied the putative class members off-duty meal periods and rest breaks and that it had failed to include certain reimbursements and an annual bonus payment in calculating the employees’ hourly rate of overtime pay.

Martinez v. Combs, 49 Cal. 4th 35 (2010)

Plaintiffs are seasonal agricultural workers whom Munoz & Sons had employed during the 2000 strawberry season. The employees sued Munoz and two produce merchants (through whom Munoz sold strawberries) for alleged minimum wage violations. Following Munoz’s bankruptcy, plaintiffs contended that the produce merchants were joint employers along with Munoz; that plaintiffs were the third-party beneficiaries of the contract between Munoz and the merchants; and that they were parties to an oral employment agreement with one of the merchants. The California Supreme Court held that although the Industrial Wage Commission’s (“IWC”) wage orders do generally define the employment relationship in actions to recover unpaid minimum wages, the IWC’s definition of “employer” does not impose liability on individual corporate agents acting within the scope of their agency.

Rodriguez v. Maricopa County Cmty. Coll., 605 F.3d 703 (9th Cir. 2010)

Professor Walter Kehowski sent three racially-charged emails over a distribution list maintained by the college district where he teaches math. Every district employee with an email address received Kehowski’s messages, including plaintiffs in this case – a certified class of the district’s Hispanic employees. Plaintiffs sued the district, its governing board and two district administrators, claiming their failure to properly respond to the emails created a hostile environment in violation of Title VII and the Equal Protection Clause.

The California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement opined that an intensive educational and training program designed for young urban adults (18-24 years old) that places these individuals in internships with non-profit and for-profit businesses is exempt from the minimum wage law (interns receive a stipend but not a salary or wages). DLSE Opinion Letter (Apr. 7, 2010), available at http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/OpinionLetters-byDate.htm.

Rosas v. The Corporation of the Catholic Archbishop of Seattle, 598 F.3d 668 (9th Cir. 2010)

Cesar Rosas and Jesus Alcazar were Catholic seminarians who sued the Corporation of the Catholic Archbishop for, among other things, failure to pay them overtime wages under Washington state law. Based on the ministerial exception, the district court dismissed the case on the pleadings. The Ninth Circuit affirmed,…

Bamonte v. City of Mesa, 598 F.3d 1217 (9th Cir. 2010)

The plaintiffs in this case are employed as police officers for the City of Mesa, Arizona. They contended that the city violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) by failing to compensate them for the time spent donning and doffing their uniforms and accompanying gear. The district court dismissed the lawsuit on summary…

Arenas v. El Torito Restaurants, Inc., 183 Cal. App. 4th 723 (2010)

The plaintiffs in this case are salaried managers at El Torito, El Torito Grill and Guadala Harry’s restaurants in California from May 2002 to the present. Plaintiffs alleged they were misclassified as employees exempt from overtime because they routinely spent more than half of their working hours performing duties delegated to non-exempt…

Wald v. Truspeed, 184 Cal. App. 4th 378 (2010)

Alex Wald, who is in the business of “finding, buying and then selling again used Porsches,” found 11 Porsches for Truspeed (a car dealer), which Truspeed sold without paying Wald the finder’s fee. In response to Wald’s lawsuit against Truspeed alleging breach of contract, unjust enrichment and fraud, Truspeed asserted that Wald lacked a dealer’s…