Martinez

Litigation by class action has long been recognized as a superior method of resolving wage and hour claims in California (see Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court (2012) 53 Cal.4th 1004, 1033 [ 139 Cal.Rptr.3d 315 , 273 P.3d 513 ] (Brinker)), including those seeking redress for unpaid overtime wages. Nonetheless, when confronted with the myriad individual facts asserted by employers in support of the executive exemption as a defense to a wage claim, courts at all levels have struggled to answer the question central to certification of a class — that is, “whether the theory of recovery advanced by the proponents of certification is, as an analytical matter, likely to prove amenable to class treatment.” (Sav-On Drug Stores, Inc. v. Superior Court (2004) 34 Cal.4th 319, 327 [ 17 Cal.Rptr.3d 906 , 96 P.3d 194 ] (Sav-On); accord, Duran v. U.S. Bank National Assn. (2014) 59 Cal.4th 1, 28 [ 172 Cal.Rptr.3d 371 , 325 P.3d 916 ] (Duran); Ayala v. Antelope Valley Newspapers, Inc. (2014) 59 Cal.4th 522, 531 [ 173 Cal.Rptr.3d 332 , 327 P.3d 165 ] (Ayala).)

Here, the trial court, after wrestling with the factual issues raised by defendants Crab Addison, Inc., Ignite Restaurant…