Dailey v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
IRION, J.
I
INTRODUCTION
William Dailey (Dailey), individually and on behalf of a proposed class of similarly situated individuals, sued Sears, Roebuck and Co. (Sears), alleging several causes of action arising from Dailey’s core contention that Sears violated California’s wage and hour laws, including those governing overtime pay and rest and meal breaks, with respect to its auto center “Managers” and “Assistant Managers” (collectively, the proposed class members). Dailey sought to certify the proposed class, arguing that his theory of liability is particularly well suited to class…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. DukesSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
- Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2007
- Linder v. Thrifty Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 2000
- Sav-On Drug Stores, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by44 opinions
- Duran v. U.S. Bank National Assn.California Supreme Court · 2014
- Ayala v. Antelope Valley Newspapers, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2014
- Tellez v. Rich Voss Trucking, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2015
- Williams v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- Alberts v. Aurora Behavioral Health CareCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.