Joseph Amey, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Cinemark USA Inc., and Does 1 through 100, inclusive
Published: Feb. 27, 2016 | Result Date: Feb. 4, 2016 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 3:13-cv-05669-WHO Bench Decision – Defense
Court
USDC Northern
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Scott E. Cole
(Cole & Van Note)
Stan Karas
(Glancy, Prongay & Murray LLP)
Robert J. Drexler Jr.
(Capstone Law APC)
Jonathan U. Lee
(Office of the U.S. Attorney)
Matthew R. Bainer
(The Bainer Law Firm)
Defendant
Emily Burkhardt Vicente
(Hunton, Andrews & Kurth LLP)
Facts
Joseph Amey, Silken Brown, and Mario De La Rosa, brought a class action complaint for wage and hour violations against Cinemark USA Inc., seeking damages, injunctive relief and restitution.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Amey contended that defendant had a consistent policy of willfully failing to provide meal and rest periods to himself and other employee class members, timely remit compensation owed upon termination, or provide accurate itemized wage statements.
DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Cinemark contended that it was entitled to summary judgment because Amey did not properly plead an off-the-clock claim and admitted that Cinemark was not aware of any off-the-clock work he may have performed.
Result
The court entered judgment in favor of Cinemark on various claims and on several remaining claims that the parties had resolved pursuant to the parties' settlement and expressly subject to a preservation of plaintiffs' Brown and De La Rosa's appellate rights of class claims and PAGA claims, as to plaintiff Brown only.
Other Information
FILING DATE: Dec. 6, 2013.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390