Legal Opinion
Armenta v. Osmose, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 29, 2005No. B174806, B177501PublishedCited by 74 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
COFFEE, J.
Here we decide the proper method for determining whether California’s minimum wage law has been violated under Labor Code section 1194 and how to calculate the waiting time penalties under section 203.
Appellant Osmose, Inc. appeals from the judgment awarding its former employees, respondents, a total of $90,398.22 in unpaid minimum wages, liquidated damages under section 1194.2, waiting time penalties under section 203, and attorney’s fees and costs in the amount of $301,625.40 and $7,110.97, respectively.
Appellant contends the judgment must be reversed because the trial…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Ramirez v. Yosemite Water CompanyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
- Morillion v. Royal Packing Co.California Supreme Court · 2000
- Tidewater Marine Western, Inc. v. BradshawCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
- United States v. Klinghoffer Bros. Realty Corp., Irving Jacobson and Albert KlinghofferCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1961
- United States Department of Labor v. Cole Enterprises, Inc., and William C. ColeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1995
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by74 opinions
- Amaral v. Cintas Corp. No. 2California Court of Appeal · 2008
- Aaron Senne v. Kansas City Royals BaseballCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
- Ricardo Bermudez Vaquero v. Ashley Furniture IndustriesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- Cindy Castillo v. Bank of America, NaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2020
- Tan v. Grubhub, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2016
69 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.