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
Compensations, Benefits
Wage and Hour, Class Action

Melissa Jackson, an Individual on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Courtyard Marriott, Hampton Inn, Marriott Hotel Services Inc., Residence Inn, Tharaldson Employee Management Co., Tharaldson Lodging Inc.

Published: Feb. 20, 2010 | Result Date: Sep. 30, 2009 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 8:08-cv-004000-DOC-MLG Settlement –  To Be Determined, Based On Claims Made

Court

USDC Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Scott B. Cooper
(Orange County Superior Court)

Roger R. Carter
(The Carter Law Firm)

Richard E. Quintilone II
(Quintilone & Associates)


Defendant

Sabrina L. Shadi
(Baker & Hostetler LLP)

Dawn Kennedy

Margaret Rosenthal
(Baker & Hostetler LLP)


Facts

Plaintiff Melissa Jackson was a front desk clerk for a Marriott Hotel franchisee, Tharaldson Lodging, beginning in February 2004. Jackson claimed that she, along with 1,800 other hourly, nonexempt chain employees, were required to work off the clock, without meal and rest breaks. The other employees, who formed a class action, were comprised of maintenance, security, housekeeping and reception workers. Jackson sued Tharaldson entities as well as other brands, claiming violations of the California Labor Code, Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order, and California Business and Professions Code.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
Jackson, and the class, contended that errors were made when transferring information from employee punch cards into the hotels' computer system. She further alleged that payment was stated as to the federal overtime standard, and not the California overtime standard, and failed to calculate extra hours for missed meals. Jackson stated that she notified her supervisor of these complaints, who did not respond.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
The defense contended that they paid their employees properly and the law was uncertain as to whether an employer had to simply provide meal breaks or whether an employer her to make sure that employees took those breaks The defense also asserted defenses based on on-duty meal agreements and meal period waivers and on other grounds.

Damages

The class alleged damages for lost wages and penalties pursuant to Labor Law Section 203.

Result

The parties reached a pretrial settlement of $1,615,000, which included fees and costs, on a claims-made basis. The court awarded Jackson an additional $15,000 for acting as the class representative.


#90714

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

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