Soremekun

Soremekun v. Thrifty Payless, Inc.

Bad Law

509 F.3d 978·2007 WL 4168339·13 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 87·183 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2174·2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 27350

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 27, 200706-55035California8,344 words

Opinion

ORDER

We adopt and affirm the district court’s well-reasoned Order Granting Defendant Thrifty Payless, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment, filed November 23, 2005, attached as Appendix A.

AFFIRMED.

APPENDIX A

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Adediji Adesola SOREMEKUN, Plaintiff, v. THRIFTY PAYLESS, INC. d/b/a Rite Aid Corporation, a California corporation; Does 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendants.

CASE NO. CV 04-06868 MMM (VBKx)

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT THRIFTY PAYLESS, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Adediji Adesola Soremekun filed this action against Rite Aid Corporation, Ismail Keekeebha, Sharim Manek, and certain unnamed defendants in Los Angeles Superior Court on January 15, 2004. On July 21, 2004, he filed an amended complaint, naming Thrifty Payless, Inc. (“Thrifty”), doing business as Rite Aid Corporation (“Rite Aid”), and Does T through 100 as defendants. Soremekun, a former Rite Aid employee, alleged that defendants had intentionally engaged in a practice of failing to compensate him in accordance with the governing collective bargaining, agreements. Specifically, he asserted that Rite Aid refused to pay him wages…

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.