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
Fair Labor Standards Act

Thomas Beltran, et al. v. Olam Spices and Vegetables Inc.

Published: Jul. 9, 2021 | Result Date: Jun. 4, 2021 | Filing Date: Dec. 10, 2018 |

Case number: 1:18-cv-01676-NONE-SAB Settlement –  $4,500,000

Judge

Stanley A. Boone

Court

USDC Eastern District of California


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Edwin Aiwazian
(Lawyers for Justice PC)

Joanna Ghosh
(Lawyers for Justice PC)

Joseph Lavi
(Lavi & Ebrahimian LLP)

Vincent C. Granberry
(Lavi & Ebrahimian LLP)


Defendant

Susan K. Hatmaker
(Hatmaker Law Group)


Facts

Thomas Beltran, Mario Martinez, Juan Rivera, Maria Claudia, Obesto Cota, and Alexander Solorio were employed by Olam Spices and Vegetables, Inc. Plaintiffs brought a class action against Olam alleging California Labor Code violations, unfair business practices, and violation of California's Public Attorney General Act.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs contended that Olam required employees to perform off the clock work such as donning and doffing protective gear and therefore failed to pay for all hours worked. If an employee clocked in early, Olam would round the time to the nearest quarter hour. To ensure orders were being fulfilled in a timely manner, employees were required to work during meal and rest breaks. Plaintiffs contended defendants did not properly compensate them for working during meal breaks. Plaintiffs contended defendant failed to pay minimum wages, failed to timely pay wages upon termination of employment and did not provide accurate wage statements. Plaintiffs contended defendant did not reimburse for necessary expenditures. Plaintiffs contended defendant engaged unlawful business practices.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant denied all of the contentions.

Result

The case settled for $4,500,000.


#137367

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

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