La Parne v. Monex Deposit Co.

Good Law
714 F. Supp. 2d 1035·2010 WL 2163905·2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59768
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaApril 29, 2010Case SACV 08-0302 DOCCalifornia5,161 words

Opinion

Opinion

Carter, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Before the Court is Defendants Monex Deposit Company, Comeo Management Corporation, Monex Credit Card Company, and Metco Management Corporation’s Motion for Summary Adjudication (the “Motion”). After considering the moving, opposing, replying, surreplying papers, supplemental briefing, and evidentiary objections, as well as oral argument by counsel, the Court hereby GRANTS Defendants’ Motion.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Procedural Background

Plaintiffs Thomas La Parné and Emile Bouari (“Plaintiffs”) have brought this class action on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated. Plaintiffs were allegedly employed by Defendant Monex Deposit Company, a California limited partnership. Defendant Monex Credit Company (“Monex”) is also a California limited partnership whose general partner is Defendant Metco Management Corporation, a California corporation. Defendant Comeo Management Corporation is a California corporation whose general partner is Defendant Monex Deposit Company (collectively referred to as “Defendants”). Plaintiffs were employed as “Account Representatives” by Defendants to sell gold and other precious metals on…

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.