The Skinner Law Group v. Tacomania CA6

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 10, 2025H052898California4,451 words

Opinion

Opinion

Danner, J.

I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND1

A. Facts Tacomania, Inc. is restaurant and food truck chain owned by Flores and Romero. In July 2022, two of Tacomania’s former employees, Jose Vea

1 We draw the facts recited here from the record that was before the

trial court when it ruled on the motion for summary judgment (Yanowitz v. L’Oreal USA, Inc. (2005) 36 Cal.4th 1028, 1037), including the parties’

2 Castro and Jose Loredo Valle, hired Skinner to represent them in an action against Tacomania for alleged violations of the Labor Code. Skinner, Vea Castro, and Loredo Valle agreed to contingency fee representation. In mid-July 2022, Vea Castro and Loredo Valle each wrote Tacomania a letter on Skinner’s letterhead stating they had “hired Skinner . . . to represent [them] in pursuing [their] claims arising from [their] employment [with] Tacomania[]” and they “authorize[d] Skinner . . . to request and receive [their] payroll and personnel records arising from [their] employment with Tacomania.” Thomas P. Skinner, the sole owner of The Skinner Law Group, asserted that he mailed the letters written by Loredo Valle and Vea Castro to Tacomania at its principal place of business, and the…

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.