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

Anthony Huizar, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. California Sports Center, and Does 1 through 10, inclusive

Published: Sep. 23, 2022 | Result Date: Aug. 8, 2022 | Filing Date: Nov. 5, 2020 |

Case number: 20CV372610 Settlement –  $558,258

Judge

Sunil R. Kulkarni

Court

Santa Clara County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Kane Moon
(Moon Law Group PC)

Lilit Ter-Astvatsatryan
(Moon Law Group PC)


Defendant

Jennifer M. Protas
(Hoge, Fenton, Jones & Appel Inc.)

Maysa Saeed
(Hoge, Fenton, Jones & Appel Inc.)


Facts

California Sports Center (CSC) is a for-profit sports center that holds private gymnastics, dance, and swim classes for kids, pre-teens, and teens. Anthony Huizar was employed by CSC as a gymnastics coach from October 2017 to January 2020. Paola Navarro was employed by CSC as a lead recreational coach from August 2015 to July 2021. Both were classified as non-exempt for the duration of their employment. Huizar and Navarro filed a wage-and-hour class and PAGA representative action settlement against California Sports Center, alleging that defendant subjected them to unfair labor practices in violation of various California Labor Codes. The parties participated in mediation with Tripper Ortman and reached a settlement agreement after extensive negotiations.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs alleged that defendant unlawfully maintained a policy and practice of requiring employees to work "off-the-clock" by creating lesson plans at home. Moreover, plaintiffs maintained that defendant regularly used a system of time rounding that resulted in failing to compensate employees for all time worked and implemented an unlawful meal and rest break practice. Further, plaintiffs argued that defendant required them to acquire costly certifications, purchase company clothing, and use their personal cell phones without indemnifying or reimbursing them for all expenses and losses incurred in the discharge of their duties. Finally, plaintiff contended that defendant failed to provide itemized wage statements and pay final wages at termination.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant asserted that it complied with all of its compensation obligations and that plaintiffs were paid all wages owed. Defendant also contended that it complied with all meal and rest break obligations by providing plaintiffs with an opportunity to take all meal and rest breaks required by law. Moreover, defendant alleged that plaintiffs cannot prove that defendant willfully failed to pay all final wages at termination. Finally, defendant maintained that it provided plaintiffs with accurate itemized wage statements and that plaintiffs suffered no actual damages or harm from any inaccurate wage statements.

Result

$558,258.06 non-reversionary settlement


#139466

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

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