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

Hugo Yan, Efrain Vargas, Salomon Mejia, and on behalf of all unnamed plaintiffs similarly situated v. GST Transport Inc., America Chung Nam Transportation LLC, America Chung Nam, LLC, and Does 1 through 50, inclusive

Published: Dec. 8, 2023 | Result Date: Jun. 21, 2023 | Filing Date: Nov. 14, 2019 |

Case number: 19STCV40976 Settlement –  $790,000

Judge

David S. Cunningham III

Court

Los Angeles County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Alvin M. Gomez
(Gomez Law Group APC)

Boris Smyslov
(Gomez Law Group APC)


Defendant

Richard Q. Liu
(Innovative Legal Services PC)

Sijiu Ren
(Innovative Legal Services PC)


Facts

On November 14, 2019, Hugo Yan, Efrain Vargas, and Salomon Mejia, on behalf of all unnamed plaintiffs similarly situated, brought a class action lawsuit against GST Transport Inc. (GST), America Chung Nam Transportation LLC, and America Chung Nam, LLC, alleging various Labor Code violations. The class included all Drivers who contracted directly with GST as independent contractors from November 15, 2015, through June 21, 2023. The estimated class size was 36 class members, and the total number of qualifying weeks that all class members contracted with GST as a Driver was estimated to be 8,312.2 based on defendants' records.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs contended that defendants failed to: pay minimum wages, pay overtime compensation and interest, provide compliant meal periods and rest periods, pay for all hours worked including off-the-clock work, reimburse for necessary business expenses, provide accurate itemized wage statements, keep accurate records, and properly classify its California employees during the relevant time period. Further, plaintiffs alleged that defendants engaged in unfair business practices in violation of the California Business and Professions Code.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants denied all contentions.

Result

Defendants agreed to pay $790,000 to settle the case.


#142000

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

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