Goldthorpe

Goldthorpe v. Cathay Pacific Airways Limited

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaApril 3, 20233:17-cv-03233California521 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAN GOLDTHORPE, et al., Case No. 17-cv-03233-VC

Plaintiffs,

ORDER RE: CROSS-MOTIONS FOR

v. SUMMARY JUDGMENT

CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LIMITED, Re: Dkt. Nos. 144, 147 et al., Defendants.

The defendants’ motion for summary judgment is denied. The plaintiffs’ cross-motion for summary judgment is granted. This order assumes the reader’s familiarity with the facts of the case, the relevant law, and the arguments made by the parties. The parties cross-moved for summary judgment on the question whether the airline pilots qualify as exempt “learned professionals” under California’s Wage Order 9. No one disputes the importance of a commercial pilot’s work or the weight of their responsibility. Nor does anyone dispute that their expertise is highly technical and even specialized. But no reasonable juror could conclude that the airline pilots in this case meet the definition of a learned professional set forth in Wage Order 9 and 29 C.F.R. § 541.301. The regulations are clear that the learned professions are those that “customarily” entail “an advanced academic degree [a]s a standard (if not…

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.