Kizer

Kizer v. Tristar Risk Mgmt.

Good Law
13 Cal. App. 5th 830·2017 Cal. App. LEXIS 644·221 Cal. Rptr. 3d 207
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 26, 2017G052558California7,785 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Aronson, J.

*833 Plaintiffs and appellants Valerie Kizer and Sharal Williams (collectively, Plaintiffs) filed this putative class action against their former *834 employer, defendant and respondent Tristar Risk Management (Tristar), alleging Tristar failed to pay Plaintiffs and its other claims examiners overtime compensation because it misclassified them as exempt from California's overtime laws.

After twice continuing the hearing for supplemental briefing and evidence, the trial court denied Plaintiffs' class certification motion because they failed to present substantial evidence showing their claims were typical of the proposed class and common issues of law or fact predominated. The court found Tristar's alleged misclassification of the proposed class members suitable for class treatment, but it denied the motion because misclassification does not give rise to liability on an overtime claim unless the employees first show they worked hours or days that required overtime compensation. The court explained Plaintiffs failed to present evidence showing Tristar had a generally applicable policy or practice that required employees to work overtime, and therefore Plaintiffs failed to show they…

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.