Stevens

Stevens v. GCS Service, Inc.

Good Law
281 F. App'x 670
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 2, 2008No. 06-56035California1,168 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

James Stevens appeals from the district court’s partial summary judgment in favor of GCS Service, Inc. and Ecolab, Inc. (“GCS”) in Stevens’s putative class action suit against GCS, his former employer. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we review de novo the district court’s grant of partial summary judgment, Universal Health Servs., Inc. v. Thompson, 363 F.3d 1013 , 1019 (9th Cir.2004).

First, Stevens argues that GCS is equitably estopped from not compensating Stevens and his co-plaintiffs for their commute time because GCS charges its customers for the time and expense of them travel. To apply the doctrine of equitable estoppel, the party seeking estoppel must be ignorant of the true state of facts and must rely upon the other party’s conduct to his injury. Driscoll v. City of Los Angeles, 67 Cal.2d 297, 305 , 61 Cal.Rptr. 661 , 431 P.2d 245 (1967). Stevens has not alleged facts that show he was ignorant of or relied to his detriment on GCS’s travel time charges. We affirm the district court’s summary judgment in favor of GCS with regards to Stevens’s equitable estoppel claim.

Next, Stevens challenges the district court’s conclusion that Stevens…

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.