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 Periods

Scott Han v. New Connect Logistics, Inc.

Published: Mar. 31, 2023 | Result Date: Jun. 27, 2022 | Filing Date: Jan. 30, 2019 |

Case number: 19STCV02681 Settlement –  $549,752

Judge

David S. Cunningham III

Court

Los Angeles County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Jonathan D. Ricasa
(Law Office of Jonathan Ricasa)

Briana M. Kim
(Briana M. Kim)


Defendant

Stella K. Park
(Law Offices of Park & Zheng)

Yalan Zheng
(Law Offices of Park & Zheng)


Facts

On January 30, 2019, Scott Han, Mee Yeon Kang, Minho Han, Moon Seok Choi, and Dong Jin Kim brought a putative class and putative representative class action against New Connect Logistics, Inc., GD Trans, Inc., New Connect Transportation, Inc., New Connect Freight, Inc., Man Youn, and Seo Kyoung Choi, alleging various Labor Code violations. On June 26, 2019, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint that added Eun Su Jang as a plaintiff and putative class member. The class included non-exempt salaried employees of New Connect Logistics, Inc., GD Trans, Inc., New Connect Transportation, Inc., and New Connect Freight, Inc., who worked at any time during the period from January 30, 2015, through March 31, 2020.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs alleged that defendants failed to: pay minimum and overtime wages for all hours worked, provide meal and rest periods, timely pay resigning or terminating employees their final wages, reimburse employee expenses, and provide proper itemized wage statements for its California employees during the relevant time period. Further, plaintiffs contended that as a result of these violations, defendants violated California's Unfair Competition Law.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants denied all contentions.

Result

Defendants agreed to pay a gross total settlement of $549,752.


#140489

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

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