McFarland

McFarland v. GUARDSMARK, LLC

Good Law
538 F. Supp. 2d 1209·2008 WL 698481·2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20296
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 14, 2008C 07-3953 PJHCalifornia3,423 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hamilton, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

The parties’ cross-motions for partial summary judgment came on for hearing on February 13, 2008. Plaintiff appeared by his counsel Robin Workman and Dennis H. Qualls, and defendant appeared by its counsel Martin D. Bern and Malcolm A. Heinicke. Having read the parties’ papers and carefully considered their arguments, and good cause appearing, the court hereby GRANTS defendant’s motion and DENIES plaintiffs motion as follows and for the reasons stated at the hearing.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Johnny McFarland is a security officer who has been employed by defendant Guardsmark, LLC (“Guardsmark”) since November 2003. Guardsmark provides security services to clients. Like other Guardsmark security officers, plaintiff works at remote client sites. Plaintiff claims that on some occasions when he worked in excess of ten hours, he was not properly provided with a second meal period as required under California law.

Plaintiff filed this proposed class action in May 2007, alleging failure to pay overtime wages and compensation for missed meal breaks. Each side now seeks summary…

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.