Legal Opinion
Ruiz v. AFFINITY LOGISTICS CORP.
District Court, S.D. California
Decided March 22, 2010No. Case 05CV2125 JLS (CAB)PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER FINDING PLAINTIFF AND ABSENT CLASS MEMBERS PROPERLY CLASSIFIED AS INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS
JANIS L. SAMMARTINO, District Judge.
The above-captioned class action came before the Court without a jury on December 14, 15, and 16, 2010. Attorneys Daniel A. Osborn, Elic Eliahu Anbar,' and Adrianne J. Leven appeared on behalf of Fernando Ruiz, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated (“Plaintiffs”). Attorneys James H. Hanson and Adam Carl Smedstad appeared on behalf of Affinity Logistics Corp. (“Defendant” or “Affinity”). The Court heard testimony from…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Cantor v. CochranSupreme Court of Florida · 1966
- North American Van Lines, Inc. v. National Labor Relations BoardCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1989
- Herman v. Mid-Atlantic Installation Services, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 2000
- Sida of Hawaii, Inc. v. National Labor Relations BoardCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
- Moss v. Central of Georgia RailroadCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1975
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Ruiz v. Affinity Logistics Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Ruiz v. Affinity Logistics Corp.District Court, S.D. California · 2012