This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Employment Law
FEHA
Age Discrimination

Ron Cross v. Roadway Express Inc.

Published: Nov. 20, 2010 | Result Date: Mar. 30, 2010 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 2:07-cv-05753-AHM-JC Bench Decision –  Defense

Court

USDC Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Don S. Lemmer


Defendant

Joseph L. Chairez

Margaret Rosenthal
(Baker & Hostetler LLP)

Sabrina L. Shadi
(Baker & Hostetler LLP)


Facts

Ron Cross owned Cross Investigations, which performed security-related services for Roadway Express Inc. from 1993 until February 2007. In 2006, Cross interviewed for a staff position with Roadway, but was not offered the position. During the interview, Cross stated that he provided security services without signing the company's standard vendor agreement and without obtaining the required insurance.

Roadway subsequently asked Cross to sign the agreement and accept the same pay rate offered to its other security services vendors. Cross refused, and was offered a yard control supervisor position within the company, which he also declined.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Cross filed suit against Roadway Express, alleging Labor Code violations, as well as discrimination based on his age, in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Roadway contended that Cross was an independent contractor, and therefore it had no duty to treat him as an employee. Roadway further alleged that Cross was not terminated from employment, as he was not an employee, and that its decision not to give him the position he interviewed for was not based on age or any discriminatory factors.

Damages

Cross sought damages of $1.1 million for lost wages and benefits.

Result

The court rendered a verdict for the defense.


#104069

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390