We invite you to review our newly-posted March 2019 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:
Duffey v. Tender Heart Home Care Agency, LLC, 31 Cal. App. 5th 232 (2019)
Nichelle Duffey sued Tender Heart Home Care Agency for employment-related wage and hour claims such as unpaid overtime under the California Domestic Worker Bill of Rights (“DWBR,” Cal. Labor Code §§ 1450, et seq.). The trial court granted Tender Heart’s motion for summary judgment after determining that Duffey
The Los Angeles Times published a piece addressing the recent and abrupt change in the rules for determining who is and who is not an independent contractor in California. As is so often the case, there are many unanticipated consequences associated with these new rules.
Read the full piece here: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-dynamex-contractors-20190223-story.html
McCleery v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2018 WL 6583916 (Cal. Ct. App. 2018)
Plaintiffs/property inspectors alleged they were improperly hired as independent contractors by insurance companies and sought payment of unpaid minimum wages, overtime, meal and rest breaks, employee expense reimbursements as well as compliance with various other Labor Code provisions. The trial court concluded that plaintiffs’ proposed class action would not be superior to
On May 1, we reported about the Dynamex Operations W., Inc. v. Superior Court opinion in which the California Supreme Court adopted a new standard (the “ABC test”) for determining if a worker may properly be classified as an employee or independent contractor. Last Monday, the California Court of Appeal clarified that the “ABC” test applies only to claims arising under the California wage orders
Linton v. DeSoto Cab Co., 15 Cal. App. 5th 1208 (2017)
DeSoto Cab Co. had required Darnice Linton to pay a “gate fee” in exchange for his obtaining a taxicab to drive for each of his shifts. Linton alleged that he is an employee (not an independent contractor) and that by charging him “gate fees,” DeSoto is violating the wage and hour laws. The
Jones v. Royal Admin. Servs., 2017 WL 3401317 (9th Cir. 2017)
Charles Jones and Josh Watson (individuals whose cell phones are registered on the national do-no-call registry) sued Royal Administration Services for violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for calls that were made by telemarketers who were employed by All American Auto Protection (“AAAP”), which went bankrupt. The district court granted summary judgment
Local TV, LLC v. Superior Court, 3 Cal. App. 5th 1 (2016)
Kurt Knutsson, a technology reporter who created “Kurt the CyberGuy” video segments for use on television news programs and station websites, sued Local TV for the use by its stations of CyberGuy material. Although Knutsson had entered into a written agreement pursuant to which the CyberGuy material was distributed to the websites
Davis v. Farmers Ins. Exch., 245 Cal. App. 4th 1302 (2016)
William A. Davis brought suit against Farmers, claiming he had been wrongfully classified as an independent contractor rather than an employee and asserting that he had been wrongfully terminated on the basis of his age. The trial court directed a verdict in Farmers’s favor on the wage claim, and the jury found for Farmers
Garcia v. Seacon Logix, Inc., 190 Cal. Rptr. 3d 400 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015)
Romeo Garcia and other plaintiffs were truck drivers who transported cargo for Seacon Logix. After the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach began to implement a clean air program, which prohibited older trucks from accessing the ports, companies such as Seacon purchased new, less polluting trucks to replace