Representative Cases

Case wherein the defendant company sought to require the plaintiff to arbitrate whether he was an employee or an independent contractor before proceeding with a representative PAGA claim, based on the parties' arbitration agreement.

Under a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between plaintiff police officers' association and defendant city, each year police officers are permitted to sell back up to 40 hours of unused vacation time. In buying back vacation hours from police officers, the city pays officers only their base hourly pay. The city did not add to the vacation pay any incentive or differential pay to which officers might otherwise be entitled at the time of the buyback. The association objected to this practice and filed a grievance under terms of the MOU.

Plaintiff stayed at a hotel in San Diego operated by defendant and ordered room service from a room service menu, which stated that a service charge and applicable state tax will be added. When the meal arrived, in addition to the service charge and room delivery charge, the bill included a blank line for a tip or gratuity. Plaintiff alleged that the hotel's room service billing practice is deceptive because guests are not advised the service charge is in fact a gratuity paid to the server. Plaintiff also contends the service charge is unfair because it compels guests to pay a gratuity which should be entirely voluntary. Thus, the hotel's room service practices violate the unfair competition law (UCL), Business and Professions Code section 17200, as well as the more specific advertising provisions of section 17500. Finally, Plaintiff alleged that because other hotel patrons were subjected to the same practice, her claims would support class treatment under Code of Civil Procedure section 382 and Civil Code section 1781, subdivision (a).

Case which addressed the issue of whether a hospital's medical staff could independently sue the hospital and whether a medical staff person, as an unincorporated association, has legal standing to bring a lawsuit against the hospital to enforce its rights under the medical staff bylaws.

Decedent was hit head-on in a collision when a driver involved in a police chase crossed double-yellow lines and swerved into oncoming traffic. Decedent’s family claimed that the police used excessive force during the chase and were liable for the ensuing accident. Defendant police department claimed they were immune to liability pursuant to Vehicle Code section 17004.7, and that it had a training policy and procedure in place in regards to vehicle pursuits. At issue was whether electronic acknowledgement of receipt of the policy was insufficient to satisfy the requirement that officers certify they “received, read, and understand the policy.”

Service technicians sued their employer for various Labor Code violations based on the misclassification of the technicians as independent contractors instead of employees.