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

Chi-Fu Hsueh v. Bankers Life and Casualty Company; Marayam Habashi, and Does 1 through 20, inclusive

Published: Sep. 30, 2022 | Result Date: Aug. 18, 2022 | Filing Date: Jul. 23, 2014 |

Case number: 37-2014-00024570-CU-OE-NC Settlement –  $5,787,000

Judge

Ronald F. Frazier

Court

San Diego County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Gordon W. Renneisen
(Cornerstone Law Group)

Harry G. Lewis
(Cornerstone Law Group)


Defendant

William H. Weissman
(Littler Mendelson PC)


Facts

Bankers Life and Casualty Company, an Illinois corporation, has offices in San Diego County. Chi-Fu Hsueh, Sherri Goldsmith, Joe Prospichalall and Martin Mackey worked for Bankers at different San Diego County locations. Hseuh worked for Bankers, in its Oceanside office, from February 13, 2013 to October 18, 2013 as an insurance agent. During that time period Maryam Habashi was Bankers' Branch Sales Manager. In July 2014, Hsueh filed suit against Bankers and Habashi. Mackey also filed suit in August of 2017. While the Hsueh suit asserted claims on behalf of agents working in San Diego county, the Mackey suit was on behalf of Orange County agents. The cases made several rounds in and out of court, including defendants' attempts to remove to federal district court, to litigate in Illinois, and to compel arbitration.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: With both suits, plaintiffs contended that Bankers misclassified agents they hired to sell insurance and annuity products; they were called independent contractors when they were actually employees-defendants controlled their work, the products they sold, and what they advertised. Moreover, defendants had the right to terminate them at will, controlled working hours and conditions, and were bound by Bankers' policies, procedures, and regulations. Plaintiffs also alleged that defendants failed to reimburse for necessary business expenditures, failed to provide complete and accurate wage statements and failed to pay wages due at the end of their employment. Finally, plaintiffs also asserted class claims for restitutionary and injunctive relief under the Unfair Competition Law, representative claims under PAGA and claims for attorneys' fees.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants denied all contentions, asserting they were not liable for any of the claims set forth by plaintiffs in the action.

Settlement Discussions

The parties worked with mediator Michelle Reinglass first in May 2019. That mediation did not lead to a settlement. The parties again tried a year thereafter and in July 2021, reached an agreement.

Result

After seven years, and a few months before trial, the case settled for $5.787 million.


#139551

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

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