Boyd

Boyd v. Bank of America Corp.

Good Law
109 F. Supp. 3d 1273·2015 WL 3650207·2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78041
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMay 6, 2015Case No. SA CV 13-0561-DOC (JPRx)California18,400 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Carter, J.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT [268] AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT [297]

Before the Court are Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (“Pls. Mot.”) (Dkt. 268) and Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, or, in the Alternative, Partial Summary Judgment (“Defs. Mot.”) (Dkt. 297). Oral arguments were held on April 20, 2015. Having considered the arguments raised by the parties, the Court rules as follows: Plaintiffs’ Motion is GRANTED and Defendants’ Motion is DENIED. The Court finds that the federal and state administrative and professional exemptions and the federal highly compensated employee exemption are not applicable. As to Defendants’ Motion, summary judgment is denied as to Plaintiffs’ meal period and rest period claim. In addition, the Court finds that issues of fact exist as to good faith and willfulness. Therefore, summary judgment is denied as to Plaintiffs’ itemized, wage statement claim and waiting time penalties claim and as to the FLSA’s statute of limitations and liquidated damages provisions.

I. Background

Plaintiffs are members of a class of current…

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.