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
Wage and Hour
Meal and Rest Period

Diana Garcia, on behalf of herself and all "aggrieved employees" pursuant to Labor Code section 2698 et seq. v. Southern California Orthopedic Institute L.P., and Does 1 through 100, inclusive

Published: Jun. 17, 2022 | Result Date: Jan. 28, 2021 | Filing Date: Jan. 24, 2019 |

Case number: 19VECV00112 Settlement –  $925,000

Judge

Shirley K. Watkins

Court

Los Angeles County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Kenneth S. Gaines
(Gaines & Gaines APLC)

Daniel F. Gaines
(Gaines & Gaines APLC)

Alex P. Katofsky
(Gaines & Gaines APLC)


Defendant

Aaron R. Lubeley
(Seyfarth Shaw LLP)

Meagan S. O'Dell
(Seyfarth Shaw LLP)


Facts

Southern California Orthopedic Institute is an orthopedic practice headquartered in Van Nuys, California, but with locations in Bakersfield, Simi Valley, Thousand Oaks, Valencia, Beverly Hills and Porter Ranch. It specializes in diagnosing and treating bone, joint, and muscle injuries as well as musculoskeletal and spinal disorders in not only adults but also children. On January 24, 2019, one of its former employees, Diana Garcia, filed a Private Attorneys General Act suit in the Los Angeles Superior Court. She was employed by defendant Southern California Orthopedic Institute, from 2012 to February 2018, as a non-exempt employee.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff Garcia, as representative of the class, alleged that defendant Southern California Orthopedic Institute, violated several labor and employment codes and regulations, including: failure to provide rest and meal periods or compensating as such; failure to comply with itemized employee wage statement provisions knowingly and intentionally; failure to timely pay wages upon separation of employment. Moreover, plaintiffs further contended that such acts constituted unfair business acts and practices, and consequently, plaintiffs sought appropriate and all penalties for those violations.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants denied all allegations made by plaintiffs in regards to this case and further denied that it was liable or owed any damages or other compensation of remedies to any person with respect to plaintiffs' alleged facts or causes of action that were asserted in this action.

Result

The case settled with defendant agreeing to pay up to $925,000 plus payment of employer-side payroll taxes. Deducted from this amount would be civil penalties totaling $20,000.


#138891

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

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