Legal Opinion
Cochran v. Schwan's Home Service, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 12, 2014No. B247160PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
ASHMANN-GERST, Acting P. J.
We hold that when employees must use their personal cell phones for work-related calls, Labor Code section 2802 1 requires the employer to reimburse them. Whether the employees have cell phone plans with unlimited minutes or limited minutes, the reimbursement owed is a reasonable percentage of their cell phone bills. Because the trial court relied on erroneous legal assumptions about the application of section 2802, we must reverse the order denying certification to a class of 1,500 service managers in an action against Schwan’s Home Service, Inc. (Home…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
- Duran v. U.S. Bank National Assn.California Supreme Court · 2014
- Gattuso v. Harte-Hanks Shoppers, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2007
- Knapp v. AT&T Wireless Services, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2011
- Soderstedt v. CBIZ Southern California, LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
3Cited by29 opinions
- Alexia Herrera v. Zumiez, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2020
- Fred Bowerman v. Field Asset Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2022
- USS-POSCO Industries v. Floyd CaseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- McCleery v. Allstate Ins. Co., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- O'Connor v. Uber Technologies, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2015
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.