Ontiveros

Ontiveros v. Hronis CA5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 3, 2024F087044California2,024 words

Opinion

Opinion

INTRODUCTION

Appellant Leopoldo Ontiveros (Ontiveros) filed a class action complaint on behalf of himself and other similarly-situated farmworkers, claiming respondents Hronis, Inc. (Hronis) and Grapeco Farm Management, Inc. (Grapeco) (collectively, respondents) had failed to provide meal and rest breaks and to pay minimum and overtime wages as required by law. The trial court granted respondents’ demurrers, finding Ontiveros had failed to state a claim because he had not identified the “labor contractor” that actually employed him in his pleadings. As Ontiveros points out in his appeal, both the original complaint and the first amended complaint (FAC) alleged he was employed directly by respondents,1 and only alleged employment through a labor contractor as an alternative theory of agency liability. Since a demurrer does not lie to only a portion or a particular theory of a cause of action, but instead must lie to the entire cause of action, we reverse.

BACKGROUND

Ontiveros2 filed a putative class action complaint in Kern County Superior Court on February 14, 2023. He alleged violations of various provisions of the Labor Code, and noted he brought the suit “on behalf of…

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.