Legal Opinion

Ghazaryan v. Diva Limousine, Ltd.

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 22, 2008No. B201509PublishedCited by 46 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

PERLUSS, P. J.

Sarkis Ghazaryan appeals from the trial court’s order denying his motion to certify a class of limousine drivers allegedly under-compensated by Diva Limousine, Ltd. (Diva), in violation of California wage and hour laws. Ghazaryan’s lawsuit contests Diva’s policy of paying its drivers an hourly rate for assigned trips but failing to pay for on-call time between assignments (referred to by Diva employees as “gap time”). Because the trial court incorrectly focused on the potential difficulty of assessing the validity of Diva’s compensation policy in light of variations in…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Linder v. Thrifty Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Sav-On Drug Stores, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  3. Morillion v. Royal Packing Co.California Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Tidewater Marine Western, Inc. v. BradshawCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Gattuso v. Harte-Hanks Shoppers, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2007

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by46 opinions

  1. Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
  2. Arce v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2010
  3. Jaimez v. Daiohs USA, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2010
  4. Mendiola v. CPS Security Solutions, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2015
  5. Donohue v. AMN Services, LLCCalifornia Supreme Court · 2021

41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API