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.

Labor Law
Unfair Labor Practices
Failure to Pay All Wages Due to Discharge or Quitting Employee

Leah J. Welch v. Central Valley Children's Services Network, Greg Melton, Gayle L. Duffy, Marco Jimenez, and Does 1-50

Published: May 28, 2021 | Result Date: May 11, 2021 | Filing Date: Jan. 31, 2020 |

Case number: 20CECG00394 Demurrer –  Defense

Judge

Rosemary T. McGuire

Court

Fresno County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Pro Per


Defendant

Ian B. Wieland
(Sagaser, Watkins & Wieland PC)

Michael J. Conway
(Sagaser, Watkins & Wieland PC)


Facts

Plaintiff Leah J. Welch, a former Early Care & Education Director for Central Valley Children's Services Network, also referred to as CVCSN, filed suit against Defendants Central Valley Children's Services Network, and its employees Greg Melton, Gayle L. Duffy and Marco Jimenez. Plaintiff asserted causes of action for alleged violations of federal and state laws governing wage-and-hour requirements, unfair and unlawful business practices under Business and Professions Code section 17200, and Unfair Competition Law.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended CVCSN was a nonprofit organization that received state and federal funding, however CVCSN implemented and maintained an extensive and pervasive hostile work environment, which included subjecting Plaintiff to racial discrimination and unequal pay. Plaintiff further contended defendants failed to remedy the unlawful policy violations and misconduct, intentionally made African Americans uncomfortable, and knowingly and willingly conspired to violate Plaintiff's rights.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants denied Plaintiff's contentions and moved for dismissal based on the grounds plaintiff failed to establish that she had standing to even assert an Unfair Competition Law claim. Defendants contended since Proposition 64 amended the UCL to require that a private plaintiff show that she had actually suffered from an injury in fact and lost money or property as a result of the unfair competition, plaintiff's UCL and other claims failed because she failed to meet the standard of proof.

Result

The court dismissed the case after it determined Plaintiff failed to meet the required standard of proof.


#137158

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

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