Bell v. Farmers Insurance Exchange

Good Law
137 Cal. App. 4th 835·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 354·2006 D.A.R. 3155·40 Cal. Rptr. 3d 601·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2249
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 15, 2006A110311California1,993 words

Opinion

Opinion

Swager, J.

This fifth appeal in a complex class action concerns the propriety of postjudgment orders amending a plan of distribution and denying a motion for additional postjudgment interest. We affirm.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The plaintiffs are claims representatives of Farmers Insurance Exchange (hereafter FIE), seeking unpaid overtime compensation under Labor Code section 1194. In an earlier appeal, Bell v. Farmers Ins. Exchange (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 805 [ 105 Cal.Rptr.2d 59 ], we affirmed the trial court’s ruling that their employee class was subject to the overtime regulations of the Industrial Welfare Commission. The matter went to a jury trial. On July 10, 2001, the jury returned a special verdict finding that unpaid time-and-a-half overtime compensation owed to the class was $88,798,871.12 and unpaid double-time compensation was $1,210,337. The trial court entered a judgment on the verdict, which awarded plaintiffs prejudgment interest of 10 percent and provided for a plan of distribution of the damages. On appeal, we affirmed the judgment in most respects, reversing only the judgment for unpaid double-time compensation and directing that the plan of distribution be modified…

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.