Muldrow

Muldrow v. Surrex Solutions Corp.

Good Law
146 Cal. Rptr. 3d 447·2012 Cal. App. LEXIS 931·208 Cal. App. 4th 1381·2012 WL 3711553
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 29, 2012Nos. D057955, D058958California6,194 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Aaron, J.

I.

INTRODUCTION

In this appeal from a judgment after a bench trial, we consider two issues. First, we address whether the trial court erred in determining that an *1384 employer was not required to pay overtime wages (Lab. Code, § 510) 1 to a class of its current and former employees because they were subject to the commissioned employees exemption (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 11070, subd. 3(D)). Pursuant to this exemption, employers are not required to pay overtime wages to employees “whose earnings exceed one and one-half (1 1/2) times the minimum wage if more than half of that employee’s compensation represents commissions.” (Ibid.) Second, we address whether the trial court erred in denying the class members’ claim for missed meal periods on the ground that the employer was required only to provide such periods, and was not required to ensure that employees actually took the meal breaks.

In our initial opinion in this matter, we concluded that the trial court properly determined that the employees were subject to the commissioned employees exemption. We also concluded that the trial court had not erred in denying the meal period claim. The Supreme Court granted the…

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.