Keith Tennison v. HUB Group Trucking, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaDecember 28, 20202:20-cv-05076California6,581 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. Background

A. The Parties

It is alleged that Tennison is a resident of San Bernardino County who has worked for Defendants as a non-exempt hourly employee. Dkt. 1-2 ¶ 9. Plaintiff seeks to represent the following eight classes, each of which is comprised of California-based, non-exempt, hourly-paid, current and former employees who are California citizens:

1. those to whom Defendants failed to pay overtime wages during the applicable time period (the “Overtime Class”); 2. those to whom Defendants failed to pay the required minimum wage during the applicable time period (the “Minimum Wage Class”); 3. those to whom Defendants failed to pay the premium rate for overtime pay during the applicable time period (the “Overtime Rate Class”); 4. those to whom Defendants failed to provide with meal periods during the relevant time period (the “Meal Period Class”); 5. those to whom Defendants failed to provide with rest periods during the relevant time period (the “Rest Period Class”); 6. those to whom Defendants failed to provide with accurate itemized wage statements during the relevant time period (the “Wage Statement Class”); 7. those to whom Defendants failed to pay all…

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.