Hudson

Hudson v. Regency Air CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 17, 2024G062534California4,800 words

Opinion

Opinion

Motoike, J.

Filed 12/17/24 Hudson v. Regency Air CA4/

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

ALEXA HUDSON,

Plaintiff and Appellant, G062534

v. (Super. Ct. No. 30-2020- 01143610)

REGENCY AIR, LLC,

OPINION

Defendant and Respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, James L. Crandall, Judge. Affirmed. Law Office of Corbett H. Williams and Corbett H. Williams for Plaintiff and Appellant. Cone & Kassel and John A. Cone, Jr., for Defendant and Respondent. Plaintiff Alexa Hudson was employed by defendant Regency Air, LLC (Regency Air), where she was paid a salary, worked Monday through Friday in the office, and sometimes was on call during the weekend. Following a bench trial, the trial…

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.