Legal Opinion

Muldrow v. Surrex Solutions Corp.

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 29, 2012No. Nos. D057955, D058958PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

AARON, J.

I

INTRODUCTION

In this appeal from a judgment after a bench trial, we consider two issues. First, we address whether the trial court erred in determining that an *1384employer was not required to pay overtime wages (Lab. Code, § 510)1 to a class of its current and former employees because they were subject to the commissioned employees exemption (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 11070, subd. 3(D)). Pursuant to this exemption, employers are not required to pay overtime wages to employees “whose earnings exceed one and one-half (1 1/2) times the minimum wage if more than half of that…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Ramirez v. Yosemite Water CompanyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Jaimez v. Daiohs USA, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2010
  3. Cicairos v. Summit Logistics, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2005
  4. Dong Yi and Edgar Martinez, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Sterling Collision Centers, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007
  5. Silverbrand v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Balasanyan v. Nordstrom, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 2012
  2. Hammitt v. Lumber Liquidators, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 2014
  3. Naranjo v. Doctors Medical Ctr. of Modesto, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2025
  4. Richardson v. Ruan Transport Corp. CA5California Court of Appeal · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API