Taylor

Taylor v. Tesla, Inc.

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 8, 2024A168333California5,165 words

Opinion

Opinion

Streeter, J.

Filed 8/8/

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

SHARONDA TAYLOR et al., Plaintiffs and Respondents, A168333 v. (Alameda County Super. Ct. TESLA, INC., No. 23CV028922) Defendant and Appellant.

In this Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA) (Lab. Code, § 2698 et seq.) action, Tesla Inc. (Tesla) appeals from the denial of a motion under the anti-SLAPP statute (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16).1 Seeing no merit to any of Tesla’s arguments, we affirm. I. Plaintiffs Sharonda Taylor, Shaka Green, Tatianna Smith and Zenobia Milligan worked for Tesla for different periods between July 2015 through March 2022. Through their counsel, Bryan Schwarz Law (BSL), they each requested that Tesla provide them with certain personnel records pursuant to the California Labor Code. BSL serves as counsel for the plaintiffs in Vaughn v. Tesla, Alameda County Superior Court No. RG17882082 (Vaughn), a class action filed

1 All undesignated statutory references are to the Code of Civil

Procedure.

1 against Tesla on November 13, 2017. As alleged, the Vaughn…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.