Preview
DATE FILED: June 8, 2017 6:18 PM
DISTRICT COURT, COUNTY OF BOULDER, FILING ID: 37F1C00E5F09D
STATE OF COLORADO CASE NUMBER: 2017CV30607
Court Address: 1777 6th Street
Boulder, CO 80302
_____________________________________________________
Plaintiff: ANA MARIA TEJADA RUBIO
v.
Defendant: Z-AXIS TECH SOLUTIONS, INC. ▲COURT USE ONLY▲
On behalf of Plaintiff:
Brian R. Reynolds, No. 29493 Case No.:
Patrick Gillette, No. 42848
REYNOLDS GILLETTE LLC Division:
955 Bannock Street, #200
Denver, CO 80204
Phone: (720) 442-8100
E-mail: brian@trialcolorado.com
patrick@trialcolorado.com
COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff Ana Maria Tejada Rubio, through her undersigned counsel, hereby complains
against Defendant Z-Axis Tech Solutions, Inc., as follows:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
This action arises out of Defendant’s failure to pay Plaintiff wages due following Plaintiff’s
employment termination.
PARTIES AND VENUE
1. Plaintiff Ana Maria Tejada Rubio is a resident of the City and County of
Broomfield, Colorado.
2. Defendant Z-Axis Tech Solutions, Inc. is a California corporation that at all times
relevant hereto employed numerous individuals, including Plaintiff, to perform labor and services
in Boulder, Colorado.
3. Venue in this judicial district is proper pursuant to Colo. R. Civ. P. 98(b)(1).
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
4. Defendant Z-Axis Tech Solutions Inc. (“Defendant”) is a California corporation
that provides consulting, localization, and information technology services to business clients
across the United States.
5. In July 2016, Defendant offered Plaintiff Ana Maria Tejada Rubio (“Plaintiff”)
employment as a solutions architect. See Exhibit 1: July 14, 2016 offer letter.
6. Plaintiff accepted Defendant’s offer and began working for Defendant in August
2016.
7. As a solutions architect, Plaintiff worked full-time for Defendant, furnishing
localization and translation services to Defendant’s client in Boulder, Colorado.
8. In exchange for Plaintiff’s labor and services, Defendant agreed to compensate
Plaintiff with wages in the form of:
a. Salary. Defendant agreed to pay Plaintiff $80,000.00 per year, payable at regular
intervals. See Exhibit 1. For the first several months of Plaintiff’s employment,
Defendant paid Plaintiff her salary every other week; beginning in December 2016,
however, Defendant changed the frequency of its salary payments to once per
month.
b. Paid time off (“PTO”). In accordance with Defendant’s policy and employee
handbook, Defendant awarded Plaintiff .833 days of PTO for each full month of
Plaintiff’s employment and, upon Plaintiff’s termination, agreed to pay Plaintiff for
all accrued but unused PTO.
9. Defendant paid Plaintiff most of her salary for the work Plaintiff performed
between her hire date and December 31, 2016, and credited Plaintiff with the PTO to which she
was entitled.
10. Plaintiff continued to work for Defendant after December 31, 2016.
11. On or about January 27, 2017, before Plaintiff was paid for the work she performed
subsequent to December 31, 2016, one of Defendant’s human resource managers telephoned
Plaintiff and informed her that she was being laid off.
2
12. Following this telephone call, Defendant’s Account Manager, Sanjeev Reddy, sent
Plaintiff a letter confirming Plaintiff’s employment termination due to “budget cuts and
downsizing.” Exhibit 2: January 27, 2017 layoff letter.
13. Sanjeev Reddy’s letter further stated that Plaintiff’s last day of employment would
be February 9, 2017, and that, “[i]n conjunction with applicable state law, [Defendant] will issue
[Plaintiff’s] final check on February 15, 2017.” Id.
14. After Plaintiff’s termination, Plaintiff discovered that Defendant had improperly
withheld wages from Plaintiff’s paychecks to pay for health insurance that Plaintiff neither
requested nor received.
15. Plaintiff contacted Defendant to inquire about these improperly withheld wages, as
well as about her final paycheck and the amounts owed her by Defendant.
16. Defendant did not promptly respond to Plaintiff’s inquiries, nor did Defendant issue
Plaintiff her final paycheck or otherwise pay Plaintiff for the work Plaintiff performed subsequent
to December 31, 2016.
17. On February 27, 2017, nearly two weeks after the date on which Defendant had
promised to issue Plaintiff’s final paycheck, Sanjeev Reddy sent Plaintiff an email containing a
breakdown of Plaintiff’s “final wage calculations.” See Exhibit 3: February 27, 2017 email.
18. In that email, Defendant admitted owing Plaintiff $8,787.87 in wages in the form
of salary, $682.45 in wages in the form of accrued but unused PTO, and $285.78 in reimbursements
for wages Defendant improperly withheld from Plaintiff’s prior paychecks. Id.
19. Nevertheless, despite acknowledging it owed Plaintiff at least $9,756.10 in wages,
and despite Plaintiff’s repeated demands, Defendant did not pay Plaintiff any of the amounts it
owed her.
20. On or about May 9, 2017, more than three months after Defendant terminated
Plaintiff’s employment, Plaintiff made her last demand upon Defendant for her unpaid wages. See
Exhibit 4: May 9, 2017 wage demand letter.
21. Plaintiff made the aforementioned demand in writing and mailed it to Defendant’s
correct principal executive office address. See id.
22. As of the date of this filing, Defendant has not paid Plaintiff the wages it owes her.
3
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Violation of the Colorado Wage Claim Act, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-4-109)
23. Plaintiff adopts and incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as though
fully set forth herein.
24. Plaintiff was an employee of Defendant.
25. In exchange for Plaintiff’s labor and services, Defendant agreed to pay wages to
Plaintiff, including a salary of $80,000.00 per year and the right to accrued PTO that Plaintiff
would be paid for upon her termination.
26. Defendant paid wages to Plaintiff for Plaintiff’s labor and services through
December 31, 2016, but improperly withheld wages from some of Plaintiff’s paychecks to pay for
health insurance that Plaintiff neither requested nor received.
27. Notwithstanding Defendant’s improper withholding of certain wages payable to
Plaintiff prior to December 31, 2016, Plaintiff remained an employee of Defendant and performed
labor and services for Defendant after this time.
28. On or about January 27, 2017, Defendant informed Plaintiff that her employment
was being terminated due to budget cuts and downsizing and that Plaintiff’s last day of
employment with Defendant would be February 9, 2017.
29. Under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-4-109(1),
When an interruption in the employer-employee relationship by volition of the
employer occurs, the wages or compensation for labor or service earned, vested,
determinable, and unpaid at the time of such discharge is due and payable
immediately. If at such time the employer’s accounting unit, responsible for the
drawing of payroll checks, is not regularly scheduled to be operational, then the
wages due the separated employee shall be made available to the employee no later
than six hours after the start of such employer’s accounting unit’s next regular
workday; except that, if the accounting unit is located off the work site, the
employer shall deliver the check for wages due the separated employee no later
than twenty-four hours after the start of such employer’s accounting unit’s next
regular workday…
30. At the time Defendant terminated Plaintiff’s employment, Defendant owed Plaintiff
earned, vested, and determinable wages or compensation.
31. Indeed, Defendant admitted it owed Plaintiff at least $9,756.10 in earned, vested,
and determinable wages.
4
32. Defendant did not pay Plaintiff her earned, vested, and determinable wages in
accordance with Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-4-109(1).
33. Plaintiff demanded payment of her wages, including via a May 10, 2017, letter
mailed to Defendant’s correct address.
34. Despite Plaintiff’s wage demand, Defendant has refused and failed to pay Plaintiff
the earned, vested, and determinable wages it owes her.
35. Defendant’s conduct as described in this claim for relief has directly and
proximately caused Plaintiff to suffer damages in amounts to be proven at trial.
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Breach of Contract)
36. Plaintiff adopts and incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as though
fully set forth herein.
37. Plaintiff and Defendant entered into an employment contract.
38. Pursuant to the parties’ contract, in exchange Plaintiff’s labor and services,
Defendant agreed to pay Plaintiff a salary and to provide Plaintiff with accruing PTO that
Defendant would pay Plaintiff for at the end of Plaintiff’s employment.
39. Plaintiff performed labor and services for Defendant and accrued PTO in
accordance with Defendant’s PTO policy.
40. Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff’s salary for all of the labor and services she
performed for Defendant and failed to compensate Plaintiff for her PTO upon the termination of
her employment.
41. In failing to pay Plaintiff’s salary and failing to compensate Plaintiff for her accrued
PTO, Defendant materially breached the parties’ contract.
42. Defendant’s conduct as described in this claim for relief has directly and
proximately caused Plaintiff to suffer damages in amounts to be proven at trial.
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Promissory Estoppel)
43. Plaintiff adopts and incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as though
fully set forth herein.
5
44. Defendant promised to pay Plaintiff a salary and to compensate Plaintiff for accrued
PTO in exchange for Plaintiff’s performance of labor and services for Defendant.
45. Defendant reasonably should have expected that its promise would induce Plaintiff
to perform labor and services for Defendant.
46. Plaintiff did, in fact, reasonably and detrimentally rely upon Defendant’s promise
when performing labor and services for Defendant.
47. Defendant’s promise must be enforced to prevent injustice.
FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Unjust Enrichment)
48. Plaintiff adopts and incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as though
fully set forth herein.
49. At Plaintiff’s expense, Plaintiff conferred benefits upon Defendant by performing
labor and services for Defendant.
50. Defendant received and realized the benefits of Plaintiff’s labor and services.
51. Under these circumstances, it would be unjust for Defendant to retain the benefits
Plaintiff conferred upon it without paying commensurate compensation to Plaintiff.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests the Court enter judgment in her favor and
against Defendant for:
A. Plaintiff’s general and special damages;
B. All available statutory damages and penalties as awardable pursuant to Colo. Rev.
Stat. § 8-4-109 and/or any other recognized basis;
C. Plaintiff’s costs and expenses incurred in this action as awardable pursuant to Colo.
Rev. Stat. § 8-4-110, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-16-104, Colo. R. Civ. P. 54(d), and/or
any other recognized basis;
D. Plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees incurred in this action as awardable pursuant to Colo.
Rev. Stat. § 8-4-110 and/or any other recognized basis;
E. All pre-judgment interest, post-judgment interest, and moratory interest available
by law; and
6
F. Such additional relief as this Court deems just.
PLAINTIFF DEMANDS A TRIAL BY JURY.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 8th day of June, 2017.
REYNOLDS GILLETTE LLC
By: /s/Patrick Gillette .
Patrick Gillette, No. 42848
Brian R. Reynolds, No. 29493
955 Bannock Street, #200
Denver, CO 80204
(720) 442-8100
patrick@trialcolorado.com
brian@trialcolorado.com
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
Plaintiff’s address:
1151 Dexter Street
Broomfield, CO 80020
7
Preview
DATE FILED: June 8, 2017 6:18 PM DISTRICT COURT, COUNTY OF BOULDER, FILING ID: 37F1C00E5F09D STATE OF COLORADO CASE NUMBER: 2017CV30607 Court Address: 1777 6th Street Boulder, CO 80302 _____________________________________________________ Plaintiff: ANA MARIA TEJADA RUBIO v. Defendant: Z-AXIS TECH SOLUTIONS, INC. ▲COURT USE ONLY▲ On behalf of Plaintiff: Brian R. Reynolds, No. 29493 Case No.: Patrick Gillette, No. 42848 REYNOLDS GILLETTE LLC Division: 955 Bannock Street, #200 Denver, CO 80204 Phone: (720) 442-8100 E-mail: brian@trialcolorado.com patrick@trialcolorado.com COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Plaintiff Ana Maria Tejada Rubio, through her undersigned counsel, hereby complains against Defendant Z-Axis Tech Solutions, Inc., as follows: NATURE OF THE ACTION This action arises out of Defendant’s failure to pay Plaintiff wages due following Plaintiff’s employment termination. PARTIES AND VENUE 1. Plaintiff Ana Maria Tejada Rubio is a resident of the City and County of Broomfield, Colorado. 2. Defendant Z-Axis Tech Solutions, Inc. is a California corporation that at all times relevant hereto employed numerous individuals, including Plaintiff, to perform labor and services in Boulder, Colorado. 3. Venue in this judicial district is proper pursuant to Colo. R. Civ. P. 98(b)(1). FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 4. Defendant Z-Axis Tech Solutions Inc. (“Defendant”) is a California corporation that provides consulting, localization, and information technology services to business clients across the United States. 5. In July 2016, Defendant offered Plaintiff Ana Maria Tejada Rubio (“Plaintiff”) employment as a solutions architect. See Exhibit 1: July 14, 2016 offer letter. 6. Plaintiff accepted Defendant’s offer and began working for Defendant in August 2016. 7. As a solutions architect, Plaintiff worked full-time for Defendant, furnishing localization and translation services to Defendant’s client in Boulder, Colorado. 8. In exchange for Plaintiff’s labor and services, Defendant agreed to compensate Plaintiff with wages in the form of: a. Salary. Defendant agreed to pay Plaintiff $80,000.00 per year, payable at regular intervals. See Exhibit 1. For the first several months of Plaintiff’s employment, Defendant paid Plaintiff her salary every other week; beginning in December 2016, however, Defendant changed the frequency of its salary payments to once per month. b. Paid time off (“PTO”). In accordance with Defendant’s policy and employee handbook, Defendant awarded Plaintiff .833 days of PTO for each full month of Plaintiff’s employment and, upon Plaintiff’s termination, agreed to pay Plaintiff for all accrued but unused PTO. 9. Defendant paid Plaintiff most of her salary for the work Plaintiff performed between her hire date and December 31, 2016, and credited Plaintiff with the PTO to which she was entitled. 10. Plaintiff continued to work for Defendant after December 31, 2016. 11. On or about January 27, 2017, before Plaintiff was paid for the work she performed subsequent to December 31, 2016, one of Defendant’s human resource managers telephoned Plaintiff and informed her that she was being laid off. 2 12. Following this telephone call, Defendant’s Account Manager, Sanjeev Reddy, sent Plaintiff a letter confirming Plaintiff’s employment termination due to “budget cuts and downsizing.” Exhibit 2: January 27, 2017 layoff letter. 13. Sanjeev Reddy’s letter further stated that Plaintiff’s last day of employment would be February 9, 2017, and that, “[i]n conjunction with applicable state law, [Defendant] will issue [Plaintiff’s] final check on February 15, 2017.” Id. 14. After Plaintiff’s termination, Plaintiff discovered that Defendant had improperly withheld wages from Plaintiff’s paychecks to pay for health insurance that Plaintiff neither requested nor received. 15. Plaintiff contacted Defendant to inquire about these improperly withheld wages, as well as about her final paycheck and the amounts owed her by Defendant. 16. Defendant did not promptly respond to Plaintiff’s inquiries, nor did Defendant issue Plaintiff her final paycheck or otherwise pay Plaintiff for the work Plaintiff performed subsequent to December 31, 2016. 17. On February 27, 2017, nearly two weeks after the date on which Defendant had promised to issue Plaintiff’s final paycheck, Sanjeev Reddy sent Plaintiff an email containing a breakdown of Plaintiff’s “final wage calculations.” See Exhibit 3: February 27, 2017 email. 18. In that email, Defendant admitted owing Plaintiff $8,787.87 in wages in the form of salary, $682.45 in wages in the form of accrued but unused PTO, and $285.78 in reimbursements for wages Defendant improperly withheld from Plaintiff’s prior paychecks. Id. 19. Nevertheless, despite acknowledging it owed Plaintiff at least $9,756.10 in wages, and despite Plaintiff’s repeated demands, Defendant did not pay Plaintiff any of the amounts it owed her. 20. On or about May 9, 2017, more than three months after Defendant terminated Plaintiff’s employment, Plaintiff made her last demand upon Defendant for her unpaid wages. See Exhibit 4: May 9, 2017 wage demand letter. 21. Plaintiff made the aforementioned demand in writing and mailed it to Defendant’s correct principal executive office address. See id. 22. As of the date of this filing, Defendant has not paid Plaintiff the wages it owes her. 3 FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Violation of the Colorado Wage Claim Act, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-4-109) 23. Plaintiff adopts and incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as though fully set forth herein. 24. Plaintiff was an employee of Defendant. 25. In exchange for Plaintiff’s labor and services, Defendant agreed to pay wages to Plaintiff, including a salary of $80,000.00 per year and the right to accrued PTO that Plaintiff would be paid for upon her termination. 26. Defendant paid wages to Plaintiff for Plaintiff’s labor and services through December 31, 2016, but improperly withheld wages from some of Plaintiff’s paychecks to pay for health insurance that Plaintiff neither requested nor received. 27. Notwithstanding Defendant’s improper withholding of certain wages payable to Plaintiff prior to December 31, 2016, Plaintiff remained an employee of Defendant and performed labor and services for Defendant after this time. 28. On or about January 27, 2017, Defendant informed Plaintiff that her employment was being terminated due to budget cuts and downsizing and that Plaintiff’s last day of employment with Defendant would be February 9, 2017. 29. Under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-4-109(1), When an interruption in the employer-employee relationship by volition of the employer occurs, the wages or compensation for labor or service earned, vested, determinable, and unpaid at the time of such discharge is due and payable immediately. If at such time the employer’s accounting unit, responsible for the drawing of payroll checks, is not regularly scheduled to be operational, then the wages due the separated employee shall be made available to the employee no later than six hours after the start of such employer’s accounting unit’s next regular workday; except that, if the accounting unit is located off the work site, the employer shall deliver the check for wages due the separated employee no later than twenty-four hours after the start of such employer’s accounting unit’s next regular workday… 30. At the time Defendant terminated Plaintiff’s employment, Defendant owed Plaintiff earned, vested, and determinable wages or compensation. 31. Indeed, Defendant admitted it owed Plaintiff at least $9,756.10 in earned, vested, and determinable wages. 4 32. Defendant did not pay Plaintiff her earned, vested, and determinable wages in accordance with Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-4-109(1). 33. Plaintiff demanded payment of her wages, including via a May 10, 2017, letter mailed to Defendant’s correct address. 34. Despite Plaintiff’s wage demand, Defendant has refused and failed to pay Plaintiff the earned, vested, and determinable wages it owes her. 35. Defendant’s conduct as described in this claim for relief has directly and proximately caused Plaintiff to suffer damages in amounts to be proven at trial. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Breach of Contract) 36. Plaintiff adopts and incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as though fully set forth herein. 37. Plaintiff and Defendant entered into an employment contract. 38. Pursuant to the parties’ contract, in exchange Plaintiff’s labor and services, Defendant agreed to pay Plaintiff a salary and to provide Plaintiff with accruing PTO that Defendant would pay Plaintiff for at the end of Plaintiff’s employment. 39. Plaintiff performed labor and services for Defendant and accrued PTO in accordance with Defendant’s PTO policy. 40. Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff’s salary for all of the labor and services she performed for Defendant and failed to compensate Plaintiff for her PTO upon the termination of her employment. 41. In failing to pay Plaintiff’s salary and failing to compensate Plaintiff for her accrued PTO, Defendant materially breached the parties’ contract. 42. Defendant’s conduct as described in this claim for relief has directly and proximately caused Plaintiff to suffer damages in amounts to be proven at trial. THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Promissory Estoppel) 43. Plaintiff adopts and incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as though fully set forth herein. 5 44. Defendant promised to pay Plaintiff a salary and to compensate Plaintiff for accrued PTO in exchange for Plaintiff’s performance of labor and services for Defendant. 45. Defendant reasonably should have expected that its promise would induce Plaintiff to perform labor and services for Defendant. 46. Plaintiff did, in fact, reasonably and detrimentally rely upon Defendant’s promise when performing labor and services for Defendant. 47. Defendant’s promise must be enforced to prevent injustice. FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Unjust Enrichment) 48. Plaintiff adopts and incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as though fully set forth herein. 49. At Plaintiff’s expense, Plaintiff conferred benefits upon Defendant by performing labor and services for Defendant. 50. Defendant received and realized the benefits of Plaintiff’s labor and services. 51. Under these circumstances, it would be unjust for Defendant to retain the benefits Plaintiff conferred upon it without paying commensurate compensation to Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests the Court enter judgment in her favor and against Defendant for: A. Plaintiff’s general and special damages; B. All available statutory damages and penalties as awardable pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-4-109 and/or any other recognized basis; C. Plaintiff’s costs and expenses incurred in this action as awardable pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-4-110, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-16-104, Colo. R. Civ. P. 54(d), and/or any other recognized basis; D. Plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees incurred in this action as awardable pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-4-110 and/or any other recognized basis; E. All pre-judgment interest, post-judgment interest, and moratory interest available by law; and 6 F. Such additional relief as this Court deems just. PLAINTIFF DEMANDS A TRIAL BY JURY. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 8th day of June, 2017. REYNOLDS GILLETTE LLC By: /s/Patrick Gillette . Patrick Gillette, No. 42848 Brian R. Reynolds, No. 29493 955 Bannock Street, #200 Denver, CO 80204 (720) 442-8100 patrick@trialcolorado.com brian@trialcolorado.com ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF Plaintiff’s address: 1151 Dexter Street Broomfield, CO 80020 7