Budrow

Budrow v. Dave & Buster's of California, Inc.

Good Law
171 Cal. App. 4th 875·2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 272·90 Cal. Rptr. 3d 239
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 2, 2009B205026California3,755 words

Opinion

Opinion

Flier, J.

Appellant Aaron Budrow brought a putative class action against respondent Dave & Buster’s of California, Inc., on the theory that distributions from the “tip pool” to persons who did not provide direct table service violated Labor Code section 351 (section 351). After demurrers to two of appellant’s three causes of action were sustained without leave to amend, respondent moved for summary judgment on the remaining cause of action that alleged a violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200. The court granted the motion. We affirm.

FACTS

The facts are undisputed unless we indicate otherwise.

Respondent owns and operates restaurants throughout the United States, including six in California, and employs for that purpose persons on an hourly basis. Included among these employees are servers, cocktail servers, bussers and bartenders. Appellant was employed by respondent as a cocktail server during 2002 for at least a month; he contends that he worked for respondent for three months.

Respondent’s tipping policy requires that servers contribute 1 percent of their gross sales to bartenders and other employees. It is this policy that appellant challenges on 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.