Munoz

Munoz v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.

Good Law
189 Cal. Rptr. 3d 134·2015 Cal. App. LEXIS 579·238 Cal. App. 4th 291·24 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 1853
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 30, 2015B249505California8,243 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bendix, J.

Plaintiffs Corina Munoz and Keresha Edwards appeal from an order denying certification of a class of approximately 26,000 nonexempt California current and former employees of defendant Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. (Chipotle), regarding what plaintiffs allege is Chipotle’s policy requiring employees to purchase slip-resistant shoes from a vendor, Shoes for Crews, in order to work at Chipotle’s restaurants. Plaintiffs further contend that Chipotle deducted the cost of these shoes from employee wages without obtaining the employee’s written authorization, these deductions caused wages to dip below minimum wage, and Chipotle’s pay stubs were noncom-pliant because they did not contain the start date for the pay period. Plaintiffs set forth these claims in seven causes of action, and Munoz seeks civil penalties on behalf of herself and “all current and former employees” under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA; Lab. Code, § 2698 et seq.) for all causes of action except their Business and Professions Code section 17200 claim.

We conclude that the trial court’s order denying plaintiffs’ class certification motion and granting Chipotle’s motion to deny…

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.