Preview
Electronically FILED by Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles on 05/27/2020 04:25 PM Sherri R. Carter, Executive Officer/Clerk of Court, by D. Williams,Deputy Clerk
20STCV20133
Assigned for all purposes to: Stanley Mosk Courthouse, Judicial Officer: Stuart Rice
HERSHEY LAW, P.C.
1 BRENNAN M. HERSHEY, ESQ., SBN #311464
2 brennan@hersheylaw.com
16255 Ventura Blvd., Ste. 1205
3 Encino, CA 91436
Tel: (310) 929-2190
4 Fax: (310) 929-6060
5
6
7
8 Attorney for Plaintiff, JUAN CORIA
9
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Telephone: (310) 929-2190; Facsimile: (310) 929-6060
10
FOR COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
11
JUAN CORIA, an individual; ) Case No.:
16255 VENTURA BLVD, STE. 1205
12
HERSHEY LAW, P.C.
ENCINO, CALIFORNIA 91436
)
Plaintiff, ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES:
13
)
vs. ) 1) Failure to Provide Meal Periods;
14 2) Failure to Provide Rest Periods;
)
INDUSTRIAL FIELD SERVICES, INC., a ) 3) Failure to Pay Overtime;
15 business entity form unknown; and DOES 1 4) Failure to Pay All Wages;
)
THROUGH 50, inclusive. )
16 5) Failure to Pay Waiting Time Penalties;
Defendants. ) 6) Failure to Provide Accurate Itemized
17 ) Wage Statements;
)
) 7) Age Discrimination in Violation of the
18 FEHA;
)
) 8) Failure to Prevent Discrimination and
19
) Harassment in Violation of FEHA;
20 ) 9) Wrongful Termination in Violation of
) FEHA;
21 ) 10) Wrongful Termination in Violation of
)
) Public Policy.
22 11) Unfair Business Practice.
)
23 )
)
) DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
24
)
25
COMES NOW, Plaintiff JUAN CORIA, (“Plaintiff”), by and through his attorneys Brennan
26
M. Hershey and Hershey Law, P.C., brings suit against Defendants INDUSTRIAL FIELD
27
SERVICES, INC., a business entity form unknown; and DOES 1 THROUGH 50, inclusive
28
________________________________________________________________________________________________
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1
32
1 (collectively, “Defendants”), and in support thereof states as follows:
2 INTRODUCTION
3 1) This is an action brought by the Plaintiff JUAN CORIA. Plaintiff was an employee of
4 Defendants INDUSTRIAL FIELD SERVICES, INC., a business entity form unknown (hereinafter
5 INDUSTRIAL FIELD SERVICES, INC.), at all times herein mentioned. Plaintiff was an employee
6 of defendants approximately between June of 2015 and June of 2019.
7 2) Plaintiff was a non-exempt employee working for Defendants as a Maintenance Man
8 at all times herein mentioned.
9 3) Plaintiff routinely worked for more than eight (8) hours in a day, and/or forty (40)
Telephone: (310) 929-2190; Facsimile: (310) 929-6060
10 hours in a week and, therefore, was entitled to overtime compensation under California Law.
11 4) Defendants failed to provide Plaintiff with uninterrupted meal and rest breaks as
16255 VENTURA BLVD, STE. 1205
12 required by California law.
HERSHEY LAW, P.C.
ENCINO, CALIFORNIA 91436
13 5) Defendants provided Plaintiff with inaccurate wage statements which failed to include
14 overtime or penalty hours as required by California Law.
15 6) Defendants failed to provide Plaintiff with all wages due upon termination as required
16 by California Law.
17 7) Plaintiff was Discriminated against by Defendants due to his age. In or around March
18 2019, Plaintiff was demoted by his supervisor and was told it was because he wasn’t young anymore.
19 Three months after this demotion, he was terminated from his position. He was the only employee
20 working his position who was terminated.
21 8) Defendant discriminated against Plaintiff in terms, conditions, or privileges of
22 employment in that Defendants first told Plaintiff there was “no work” for him and that he should
23 take a week off. Following this, his employment with Defendant was terminated.
24 9) Defendant failed to prevent discrimination in violation of FEHA. Plaintiff was
25 specifically targeted for his age in comparison to his co-workers and was demoted because of his
26 age and not his job performance.
27 10) Plaintiff was wrongfully terminated in violation of FEHA and Public Policy. He was
28 the only maintenance worker laid off from the company, shortly after he was demoted for his age.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
2
32
1 11) Plaintiff alleges that California statutory, decisional and regulatory laws prohibit the
2 conduct of Defendants herein alleged, and therefore Plaintiff has an entitlement to monetary relief
3 on the basis that Defendants violated such statutes, decisional law and regulations.
4 PARTIES
5 12) Plaintiff JUAN CORIA is an individual residing in the County of Los Angeles, State
6 of California.
7 13) Defendant, INDUSTRIAL FIELD SERVICES, INC., a business entity form
8 unknown, on information and belief, is conducting business in good standing in Los Angeles
9 County, state of California.
Telephone: (310) 929-2190; Facsimile: (310) 929-6060
10 JURISDICTION AND VENUE
11 14) This Court has jurisdiction over Defendant INDUSTRIAL FIELD SERVICES, INC.,
16255 VENTURA BLVD, STE. 1205
12 because Defendant INDUSTRIAL FIELD SERVICES, INC., has their principal business address,
HERSHEY LAW, P.C.
ENCINO, CALIFORNIA 91436
13 wherein Plaintiff worked, located in the County of Los Angeles, State of California.
14 15) The acts upon which this action is based occurred in the County of Los Angeles, State
15 of California.
16 ///
17 EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES
18 16) Plaintiff has exhausted his administrative remedies pursuant to Government Code,
19 Sections 12960 and 12965(b) by each timely filing an administrative complaint with the Department
20 of Fair Employment & Housing and receiving a Right to Sue letter within one year of the filing of
21 this lawsuit. In this lawsuit, Plaintiff sues only under state law though such law sometimes adopts
22 federal law.
23 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
24 Failure to Provide Meal Periods, in Violation of California Labor Code §§ 226.7 and 512, and
25 IWC Wage Orders No. 5 and 9
26 (On Behalf of Plaintiff Against all Defendants)
27 17) Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint
28 as if fully alleged herein.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
3
32
1 18) California Labor Code section 226.7(b) in relevant part provides, “An employer shall
2 not require an employee to work during a meal or rest or recovery period mandated pursuant to an
3 applicable statute, or applicable regulation, standard, or order of the Industrial Welfare
4 Commission…”Under IWC Orders No. 5 and 9, Defendant was required to provide Plaintiff one
5 off-duty meal period for every shift lasting over five (5) hours, up to ten hours, and a second off-
6 duty meal period for every shift lasting over (10) hours.
7 19) California Labor Code section 512(a) in relevant part provides, “An employer may
8 not employ an employee for a work period of more than five hours per day without providing the
9 employee with a meal period of not less than 30 minutes…”
Telephone: (310) 929-2190; Facsimile: (310) 929-6060
10 20) Defendant had a pattern and practice of requiring its employees to be on duty at all
11 times. Consequently, Defendant regularly failed to provide Plaintiff one thirty (30) minute off-duty
16255 VENTURA BLVD, STE. 1205
12 meal period for shifts lasting over five (5) hours, and a second thirty (30) minute off-duty meal
HERSHEY LAW, P.C.
ENCINO, CALIFORNIA 91436
13 period for shifts lasting over ten (10) hours.
14 21) Under section 226.7(c), an employer who violates section 226.7(b), “…shall pay the
15 employee one additional hour of pay at the employee’s regular rate of compensation for each
16 workday that the meal or rest or recovery period is not provided.”
17 22) Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff one (1) additional hour of pay at Plaintiff’s regular
18 rate of compensation for each day an off-duty meal period Plaintiff was not provided.
19 23) Defendant’s willful violation of Labor Code sections 226.7 and 512, and IWC orders
20 No. 5 and 9, caused injury to Plaintiff in the form of withheld meal periods or wages in lieu thereof.
21 Plaintiff seeks to recover damages under Labor Code section 226.7.
22 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
23 Failure to Provide Rest Periods in Violation of California Labor Code §226.7 and IWC Wage
24 Orders No. 5 and No. 9
25 (On Behalf of Plaintiff Against all Defendants)
26 24) Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint
27 as if fully alleged herein.
28
________________________________________________________________________________________________
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
4
32
1 25) California Labor Code section 226.7(b) in relevant part provides, “An employer shall
2 not require an employee to work during a meal or rest or recovery period mandated pursuant to an
3 applicable statute, or applicable regulation, standard, or order of the Industrial Welfare
4 Commission…”
5 26) Under IWC Orders No. 5 and 9, Defendant was required to provide Plaintiff one off-
6 duty rest period for every four hours, or major fraction thereof, worked.
7 27) Defendant had a pattern and practice of requiring its employees to be on duty at all
8 times. Accordingly, Defendant regularly failed to provide Plaintiff off-duty rest periods.
9 28) Under section 226.7(c), an employer who violates section 226.7(b), “…shall pay the
Telephone: (310) 929-2190; Facsimile: (310) 929-6060
10 employee one additional hour of pay at the employee’s regular rate of compensation for each
11 workday that the meal or rest or recovery period is not provided.”
16255 VENTURA BLVD, STE. 1205
12 29) Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff one (1) additional hour of pay at Plaitiff’s regular
HERSHEY LAW, P.C.
ENCINO, CALIFORNIA 91436
13 rate of compensation for each day an off-duty rest period was not provided to Plaintiff.
14 30) Defendant’s willful violation of Labor Code sections 226.7 and 512, and IWC orders
15 No. 5 and 9, caused injury to Plaintiff in the form of withheld rest periods or wages in lieu thereof.
16 Plaintiff seeks to recover damages under Labor Code section 226.7.
17 ///
18 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
19 Failure to Pay Overtime, in Violation of Labor Code §§ 510 and 1194
20 (On Behalf of Plaintiff Against all Defendants)
21 31) Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint
22 as if fully alleged herein.
23 32) California Labor Code section 510 in relevant part provides, “Any work in excess of
24 eight hours in one workday and any work in excess of 40 hours in any one workweek and the first
25 eight hours worked on the seventh day of work in any on workweek shall be compensated at the
26 rate of no less than one and one-half times the regular rate of pay for an employee. Any work in
27 excess of 12 hours in one day shall be compensated at the rate of no less than twice the regular rate
28 of pay for an employee. In addition, any work in excess of eight hours on any seventh day of a
________________________________________________________________________________________________
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
5
32
1 workweek shall be compensated at the rate of no less than twice the regular rate of pay of an
2 employee.”
3 33) California Labor Code section 1194 in relevant part provides, “…any employee
4 receiving less than the legal minimum wage or the legal overtime compensation applicable to the
5 employee is entitled to recover in a civil action the unpaid balance of the full amount of this
6 minimum wage or overtime compensation, including interest thereon, reasonable attorney’s fees,
7 and costs of suit.”
8 34) Plaintiff regularly worked in excess of eight hours in one workday and/or in excess
9 of 40 hours in any one workweek. Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff one and one-half times his
Telephone: (310) 929-2190; Facsimile: (310) 929-6060
10 regular rate for any hours worked in excess of eight hours in one workday or any hours worked in
11 excess of 40 hours in any one workweek.
16255 VENTURA BLVD, STE. 1205
12 35) Defendants had a pattern and practice of not paying Plaintiff for all hours worked,
HERSHEY LAW, P.C.
ENCINO, CALIFORNIA 91436
13 and therefore failed to pay all overtime earned by Plaintiff.
14 36) Plaintiff seeks all remedies available under Labor Code § 1194, and 1197.1.
15 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
16 Failure to Pay All Wages, in Violation of Labor Code Sections 201-202
17 (On Behalf of Plaintiff Against all Defendants)
18 37) Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this
19 Complaint as if fully alleged herein.
20 38) California Labor Code section 201(a), in relevant part, provides, “If an employer
21 discharges an employee, the wages earned and unpaid at the time of discharge are due and payable
22 immediately.”
23 39) California Labor Code section 202(a), in relevant part, provides, “If an employee not
24 having a written contract for a definite period quits his or his employment, his or his wages shall
25 become due and payable not later than seventy-two (72) hours thereafter, unless the employee has
26 given seventy-two (72) hours previous notice of his or his intention to quit, in which case the
27 employee is entitled to his or his wages at the time of quitting.”
28
________________________________________________________________________________________________
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
6
32
1 40) Defendants intentionally failed to pay Plaintiff all wages earned, including overtime,
2 at the time Plaintiff was discharged, or within seventy-two (72) hours after they quit. Defendant
3 knew or should have known that Plaintiff was owed wages for missed meal and rest periods and
4 overtime.
5 41) Defendants’ willful violations of Labor Code sections 201-202
Preview
Electronically FILED by Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles on 05/27/2020 04:25 PM Sherri R. Carter, Executive Officer/Clerk of Court, by D. Williams,Deputy Clerk 20STCV20133 Assigned for all purposes to: Stanley Mosk Courthouse, Judicial Officer: Stuart Rice HERSHEY LAW, P.C. 1 BRENNAN M. HERSHEY, ESQ., SBN #311464 2 brennan@hersheylaw.com 16255 Ventura Blvd., Ste. 1205 3 Encino, CA 91436 Tel: (310) 929-2190 4 Fax: (310) 929-6060 5 6 7 8 Attorney for Plaintiff, JUAN CORIA 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Telephone: (310) 929-2190; Facsimile: (310) 929-6060 10 FOR COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 11 JUAN CORIA, an individual; ) Case No.: 16255 VENTURA BLVD, STE. 1205 12 HERSHEY LAW, P.C. ENCINO, CALIFORNIA 91436 ) Plaintiff, ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: 13 ) vs. ) 1) Failure to Provide Meal Periods; 14 2) Failure to Provide Rest Periods; ) INDUSTRIAL FIELD SERVICES, INC., a ) 3) Failure to Pay Overtime; 15 business entity form unknown; and DOES 1 4) Failure to Pay All Wages; ) THROUGH 50, inclusive. ) 16 5) Failure to Pay Waiting Time Penalties; Defendants. ) 6) Failure to Provide Accurate Itemized 17 ) Wage Statements; ) ) 7) Age Discrimination in Violation of the 18 FEHA; ) ) 8) Failure to Prevent Discrimination and 19 ) Harassment in Violation of FEHA; 20 ) 9) Wrongful Termination in Violation of ) FEHA; 21 ) 10) Wrongful Termination in Violation of ) ) Public Policy. 22 11) Unfair Business Practice. ) 23 ) ) ) DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 24 ) 25 COMES NOW, Plaintiff JUAN CORIA, (“Plaintiff”), by and through his attorneys Brennan 26 M. Hershey and Hershey Law, P.C., brings suit against Defendants INDUSTRIAL FIELD 27 SERVICES, INC., a business entity form unknown; and DOES 1 THROUGH 50, inclusive 28 ________________________________________________________________________________________________ COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 32 1 (collectively, “Defendants”), and in support thereof states as follows: 2 INTRODUCTION 3 1) This is an action brought by the Plaintiff JUAN CORIA. Plaintiff was an employee of 4 Defendants INDUSTRIAL FIELD SERVICES, INC., a business entity form unknown (hereinafter 5 INDUSTRIAL FIELD SERVICES, INC.), at all times herein mentioned. Plaintiff was an employee 6 of defendants approximately between June of 2015 and June of 2019. 7 2) Plaintiff was a non-exempt employee working for Defendants as a Maintenance Man 8 at all times herein mentioned. 9 3) Plaintiff routinely worked for more than eight (8) hours in a day, and/or forty (40) Telephone: (310) 929-2190; Facsimile: (310) 929-6060 10 hours in a week and, therefore, was entitled to overtime compensation under California Law. 11 4) Defendants failed to provide Plaintiff with uninterrupted meal and rest breaks as 16255 VENTURA BLVD, STE. 1205 12 required by California law. HERSHEY LAW, P.C. ENCINO, CALIFORNIA 91436 13 5) Defendants provided Plaintiff with inaccurate wage statements which failed to include 14 overtime or penalty hours as required by California Law. 15 6) Defendants failed to provide Plaintiff with all wages due upon termination as required 16 by California Law. 17 7) Plaintiff was Discriminated against by Defendants due to his age. In or around March 18 2019, Plaintiff was demoted by his supervisor and was told it was because he wasn’t young anymore. 19 Three months after this demotion, he was terminated from his position. He was the only employee 20 working his position who was terminated. 21 8) Defendant discriminated against Plaintiff in terms, conditions, or privileges of 22 employment in that Defendants first told Plaintiff there was “no work” for him and that he should 23 take a week off. Following this, his employment with Defendant was terminated. 24 9) Defendant failed to prevent discrimination in violation of FEHA. Plaintiff was 25 specifically targeted for his age in comparison to his co-workers and was demoted because of his 26 age and not his job performance. 27 10) Plaintiff was wrongfully terminated in violation of FEHA and Public Policy. He was 28 the only maintenance worker laid off from the company, shortly after he was demoted for his age. ________________________________________________________________________________________________ COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 2 32 1 11) Plaintiff alleges that California statutory, decisional and regulatory laws prohibit the 2 conduct of Defendants herein alleged, and therefore Plaintiff has an entitlement to monetary relief 3 on the basis that Defendants violated such statutes, decisional law and regulations. 4 PARTIES 5 12) Plaintiff JUAN CORIA is an individual residing in the County of Los Angeles, State 6 of California. 7 13) Defendant, INDUSTRIAL FIELD SERVICES, INC., a business entity form 8 unknown, on information and belief, is conducting business in good standing in Los Angeles 9 County, state of California. Telephone: (310) 929-2190; Facsimile: (310) 929-6060 10 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 11 14) This Court has jurisdiction over Defendant INDUSTRIAL FIELD SERVICES, INC., 16255 VENTURA BLVD, STE. 1205 12 because Defendant INDUSTRIAL FIELD SERVICES, INC., has their principal business address, HERSHEY LAW, P.C. ENCINO, CALIFORNIA 91436 13 wherein Plaintiff worked, located in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. 14 15) The acts upon which this action is based occurred in the County of Los Angeles, State 15 of California. 16 /// 17 EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES 18 16) Plaintiff has exhausted his administrative remedies pursuant to Government Code, 19 Sections 12960 and 12965(b) by each timely filing an administrative complaint with the Department 20 of Fair Employment & Housing and receiving a Right to Sue letter within one year of the filing of 21 this lawsuit. In this lawsuit, Plaintiff sues only under state law though such law sometimes adopts 22 federal law. 23 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 24 Failure to Provide Meal Periods, in Violation of California Labor Code §§ 226.7 and 512, and 25 IWC Wage Orders No. 5 and 9 26 (On Behalf of Plaintiff Against all Defendants) 27 17) Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint 28 as if fully alleged herein. ________________________________________________________________________________________________ COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 3 32 1 18) California Labor Code section 226.7(b) in relevant part provides, “An employer shall 2 not require an employee to work during a meal or rest or recovery period mandated pursuant to an 3 applicable statute, or applicable regulation, standard, or order of the Industrial Welfare 4 Commission…”Under IWC Orders No. 5 and 9, Defendant was required to provide Plaintiff one 5 off-duty meal period for every shift lasting over five (5) hours, up to ten hours, and a second off- 6 duty meal period for every shift lasting over (10) hours. 7 19) California Labor Code section 512(a) in relevant part provides, “An employer may 8 not employ an employee for a work period of more than five hours per day without providing the 9 employee with a meal period of not less than 30 minutes…” Telephone: (310) 929-2190; Facsimile: (310) 929-6060 10 20) Defendant had a pattern and practice of requiring its employees to be on duty at all 11 times. Consequently, Defendant regularly failed to provide Plaintiff one thirty (30) minute off-duty 16255 VENTURA BLVD, STE. 1205 12 meal period for shifts lasting over five (5) hours, and a second thirty (30) minute off-duty meal HERSHEY LAW, P.C. ENCINO, CALIFORNIA 91436 13 period for shifts lasting over ten (10) hours. 14 21) Under section 226.7(c), an employer who violates section 226.7(b), “…shall pay the 15 employee one additional hour of pay at the employee’s regular rate of compensation for each 16 workday that the meal or rest or recovery period is not provided.” 17 22) Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff one (1) additional hour of pay at Plaintiff’s regular 18 rate of compensation for each day an off-duty meal period Plaintiff was not provided. 19 23) Defendant’s willful violation of Labor Code sections 226.7 and 512, and IWC orders 20 No. 5 and 9, caused injury to Plaintiff in the form of withheld meal periods or wages in lieu thereof. 21 Plaintiff seeks to recover damages under Labor Code section 226.7. 22 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 23 Failure to Provide Rest Periods in Violation of California Labor Code §226.7 and IWC Wage 24 Orders No. 5 and No. 9 25 (On Behalf of Plaintiff Against all Defendants) 26 24) Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint 27 as if fully alleged herein. 28 ________________________________________________________________________________________________ COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 4 32 1 25) California Labor Code section 226.7(b) in relevant part provides, “An employer shall 2 not require an employee to work during a meal or rest or recovery period mandated pursuant to an 3 applicable statute, or applicable regulation, standard, or order of the Industrial Welfare 4 Commission…” 5 26) Under IWC Orders No. 5 and 9, Defendant was required to provide Plaintiff one off- 6 duty rest period for every four hours, or major fraction thereof, worked. 7 27) Defendant had a pattern and practice of requiring its employees to be on duty at all 8 times. Accordingly, Defendant regularly failed to provide Plaintiff off-duty rest periods. 9 28) Under section 226.7(c), an employer who violates section 226.7(b), “…shall pay the Telephone: (310) 929-2190; Facsimile: (310) 929-6060 10 employee one additional hour of pay at the employee’s regular rate of compensation for each 11 workday that the meal or rest or recovery period is not provided.” 16255 VENTURA BLVD, STE. 1205 12 29) Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff one (1) additional hour of pay at Plaitiff’s regular HERSHEY LAW, P.C. ENCINO, CALIFORNIA 91436 13 rate of compensation for each day an off-duty rest period was not provided to Plaintiff. 14 30) Defendant’s willful violation of Labor Code sections 226.7 and 512, and IWC orders 15 No. 5 and 9, caused injury to Plaintiff in the form of withheld rest periods or wages in lieu thereof. 16 Plaintiff seeks to recover damages under Labor Code section 226.7. 17 /// 18 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 19 Failure to Pay Overtime, in Violation of Labor Code §§ 510 and 1194 20 (On Behalf of Plaintiff Against all Defendants) 21 31) Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint 22 as if fully alleged herein. 23 32) California Labor Code section 510 in relevant part provides, “Any work in excess of 24 eight hours in one workday and any work in excess of 40 hours in any one workweek and the first 25 eight hours worked on the seventh day of work in any on workweek shall be compensated at the 26 rate of no less than one and one-half times the regular rate of pay for an employee. Any work in 27 excess of 12 hours in one day shall be compensated at the rate of no less than twice the regular rate 28 of pay for an employee. In addition, any work in excess of eight hours on any seventh day of a ________________________________________________________________________________________________ COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 5 32 1 workweek shall be compensated at the rate of no less than twice the regular rate of pay of an 2 employee.” 3 33) California Labor Code section 1194 in relevant part provides, “…any employee 4 receiving less than the legal minimum wage or the legal overtime compensation applicable to the 5 employee is entitled to recover in a civil action the unpaid balance of the full amount of this 6 minimum wage or overtime compensation, including interest thereon, reasonable attorney’s fees, 7 and costs of suit.” 8 34) Plaintiff regularly worked in excess of eight hours in one workday and/or in excess 9 of 40 hours in any one workweek. Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff one and one-half times his Telephone: (310) 929-2190; Facsimile: (310) 929-6060 10 regular rate for any hours worked in excess of eight hours in one workday or any hours worked in 11 excess of 40 hours in any one workweek. 16255 VENTURA BLVD, STE. 1205 12 35) Defendants had a pattern and practice of not paying Plaintiff for all hours worked, HERSHEY LAW, P.C. ENCINO, CALIFORNIA 91436 13 and therefore failed to pay all overtime earned by Plaintiff. 14 36) Plaintiff seeks all remedies available under Labor Code § 1194, and 1197.1. 15 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION 16 Failure to Pay All Wages, in Violation of Labor Code Sections 201-202 17 (On Behalf of Plaintiff Against all Defendants) 18 37) Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this 19 Complaint as if fully alleged herein. 20 38) California Labor Code section 201(a), in relevant part, provides, “If an employer 21 discharges an employee, the wages earned and unpaid at the time of discharge are due and payable 22 immediately.” 23 39) California Labor Code section 202(a), in relevant part, provides, “If an employee not 24 having a written contract for a definite period quits his or his employment, his or his wages shall 25 become due and payable not later than seventy-two (72) hours thereafter, unless the employee has 26 given seventy-two (72) hours previous notice of his or his intention to quit, in which case the 27 employee is entitled to his or his wages at the time of quitting.” 28 ________________________________________________________________________________________________ COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 6 32 1 40) Defendants intentionally failed to pay Plaintiff all wages earned, including overtime, 2 at the time Plaintiff was discharged, or within seventy-two (72) hours after they quit. Defendant 3 knew or should have known that Plaintiff was owed wages for missed meal and rest periods and 4 overtime. 5 41) Defendants’ willful violations of Labor Code sections 201-202