Sam Khaledi v. YY2K Inc. dba California Pita and Grill
Published: Mar. 31, 2012 | Result Date: Feb. 10, 2012 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: BC458174 Bench Decision – $45,000
Court
L.A. Superior Central
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Brennan S. Kahn
(Perona, Langer, Beck, Serbin and Harrison APC)
Todd H. Harrison
(Perona, Langer, Beck, Serbin and Harrison APC)
Defendant
Facts
Defendant owned and operated a restaurant named California Pita and Grill. Defendant employed plaintiff Sam Khaledi as a delivery driver from November 2007 through July 2010.
Plaintiff alleged defendant failed to pay him overtime wages, failure to pay him minimum wages and failure to provide him with accurate itemized wage statements.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff proved that he was actually defendant's employee. Plaintiff demonstrated that what defendant misclassified as delivery charges were actually "tips" he inconsistently received, thus did not offset plaintiff's minimum wages owed to him. Further, plaintiff asserted that he worked 10 hours per day. As such, he demonstrated that defendant owed plaintiff overtime wages and additional wages to meet the minimum wage standard. Finally, plaintiff asserted that defendant, in an attempt to hide the wages owed to plaintiff and to commit tax fraud by avoiding the payment of payroll taxes, intentionally failed to provide plaintiff with accurate itemized wage statements.
DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant alleged that plaintiff was an independent contractor, not an employee, thus was never owed minimum wages, overtime wages nor any itemized wage statements. Defendant further contended that plaintiff worked only six or so hours per day, not the 10 hours per day plaintiff alleged, thus was not owed any overtime wages regardless of whether plaintiff was an employee or independent contractor. Finally, defendant contended that plaintiff received delivery charges, not tips, and that such delivery charges should have supplemented plaintiff's wages to meet defendant's minimum wage obligations, even where plaintiff was an employee.
Settlement Discussions
Defendant refused to engage in any settlement discussions and rejected plaintiff's offers for settlement.
Result
$45,000 for plaintiff
Other Information
The court found in favor of plaintiff as to all three causes of action. Plaintiff has filed a motion seeking an award of attorneys fees from pursuant to Labor Code sec. 226(e) and 1194(a). Defendant has filed a motion for new trial. FILING DATE: March 25, 2011.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390