Facts

As one part of Kelly Cleaning & Supplies Inc.'s diverse cleaning company, defendants utilized the services of more than 100 nighttime janitorial crews. Plaintiffs were family members who performed work under different business names. Plaintiffs obtained business licenses, signed contracts of the independent contractor relationship and performed work on Kelly Cleaning accounts for more than a decade.

In 2009, the father of plaintiffs was working with his family at a County of Ventura facility on a Kelly Cleaning account. The father (not a party to this action) did not have the proper background check and security badge required by the county for all personnel entering its facilities at night. A police dog engaged in training exercises bit the father. The father filed a claim for personal injuries against the County of Ventura.

When the father refused to withdraw the claim, Kelly Cleaning terminated all contracts with plaintiffs.

Plaintiffs sued for wage and hour violations and unfair business practices.

Trial was bifurcated to determine whether plaintiffs were properly classified as independent contractors.

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiffs contended that they were employees of Margo Kelly (dba Kelly Cleaning & Supplies) and of Kelly Cleaning & Supplies Inc., and thus were entitled to rights afforded to employees under California law.

Plaintiffs also contended that they were misclassified as independent contractors.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants contended that plaintiffs were properly classified as independent contractors and thus were correctly paid for all work performed.

Settlement Discussions

Defendants timely served a CCP 998 offer for $50,000. During trial, defendants offered to settle for a cost waiver. Plaintiffs rejected that offer and offered to settle for $295,000, which was rejected by defendants.

Result

Defense verdict on bifurcated trial regarding liability. The jury found that defendants had properly classified plaintiffs as independent contractors.

Other Information

Defendants submitted a proposed judgment that judgment be entered in favor of defendants and against plaintiffs. Defendants will be submitting a cost bill, as well as a motion for attorney fees. FILING DATE: March 18, 2010.

Deliberation

two hours

Poll

9-3 (defense)

Length

13 days