Castaneda

Castaneda v. Ensign Group CA2/6

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 7, 2014B249119California2,769 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

Castaneda filed a class action complaint on behalf of himself and other certified nursing assistants against Ensign for "unpaid minimum and overtime wages." He alleged Ensign was the alter ego of the Cabrillo Rehabilitation and Care Center (Cabrillo), a nursing facility, where he worked, and its "corporate veil should be pierced." He claimed Ensign was his employer. Ensign filed a motion for summary judgment. It said, "Castaneda's allegations against Ensign are misplaced because Ensign was not his employer. Rather than sue Cabrillo, the company that hired him, paid him, set his daily schedule . . . , [he] has sued Ensign and [EFS] [fn. omitted], neither of which was his employer as a matter of law. [¶] . . . Ensign is a holding company that has no employees and is not engaged in the direction, management or control of Cabrillo or its employees." It said Cabrillo was an independent company with "a traditional management structure." In discovery, Ensign admitted that it owned Cabrillo. It purchased it in 2009 and it owns all of its stock. In opposition to summary judgment, Castaneda submitted declarations and discovery responses. He claimed they show Ensign was properly…

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.