Hodge

Hodge v. Superior Court

Good Law
145 Cal. App. 4th 278·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 1879·2006 Daily Journal DAR 15568·51 Cal. Rptr. 3d 519·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10948
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 29, 2006No. B189941California3,376 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Cooper, J.

Many employees in the State of California who work more than 40 hours per week and eight hours per day have the right to receive payment for their overtime work. (Ramirez v. Yosemite Water Co. (1999) 20 Cal.4th 785, 789 [ 85 Cal.Rptr.2d 844 , 978 P.2d 2 ].) In a lawsuit alleging an employer violated the employee’s right to receive overtime pay, the employer bears the burden of proving the employee’s exemption. (Id. at pp. 794-795.) In this case, principally about overtime pay, plaintiffs dismissed their statutory cause of action and allege only unfair competition in violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200 et seq. (§ 17200 or the unfair competition law (UCL)).

We must decide whether defendants are entitled to a jury trial. We conclude no jury trial is warranted. The gist of the section 17200 cause of action is equitable and the relief sought is equitable even though plaintiffs could have requested damages for the same violations, even though the employer has asserted an affirmative defense, and even though the UCL cause of action will require proof of the underlying Labor Code violations.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In a class action lawsuit,…

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.