Labor/Employment,
California Supreme Court,
9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
Jul. 2, 2019
Where Troester stops not even Troester knows
While the California Supreme Court’s landmark ruling on the de minimis defense readily sniffed out unpaid time of several minutes a day as compensable, the shockwaves of that decision are still reverberating. On June 28, the 9th Circuit provided one of the first indications of the true impact of the decision.
Lilit Ter-Astvatsatryan
Associate
Moon Law Group PC
Phone: (213) 232-3128
Email: lilit@moonlawgroup.com
UC Hastings COL; San Francisco CA
Lilit emphasizes class action litigation in her legal practice.
H. Scott Leviant
Senior Counsel
Moon & Yang, APC
Email: scott.leviant@moonyanglaw.com
USC Law School; Los Angeles CA
Scott emphasizes class action litigation and appellate advocacy in his legal practice. He is the editor-in-chief and primary author of "The Complex Litigator," a weblog about complex litigation and class actions issues in California (www.thecomplexlitigator.com).
Less than a year ago, the California Supreme Court, in Troester v. Starbucks Corp., 5 Cal., 5th 829 (2018) as mod., reh. den. (Aug. 29, 2018), held that California employers cannot use the federal Fair Labor Standards Act's de minimis doctrine as a defense against claims for unpaid wages under the California Labor Code. Troester
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In