Medrano v. D'Arrigo Bros. Co. of California
District Court, N.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
AMENDED ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO DEFENDANT’S LIABILITY 1
FOGEL, District Judge.
Plaintiffs move for partial summary judgment as to the liability of Defendant in this class action lawsuit. The Court has read and considered the briefing and evidence submitted by the parties and has considered the oral arguments of counsel. For the reasons set forth below, the motion will be granted.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs, current and former employees of Defendant D’Arrigo Brothers Company of California (“D’Arrigo”), are agricultural workers. D’Arrigo is engaged in the…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- T.W. Electrical Service, Inc. v. Pacific Electrical Contractors Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- Cortez v. Purolator Air Filtration Products Co.California Supreme Court · 2000
- United States v. RosenwasserSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Armenta v. Osmose, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2005
- Cardenas v. McLane Foodservices, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2011
- Jimenez v. Servicios Agricolas Mex, Inc.District Court, D. Arizona · 2010
- Valenzuela v. Giumarra Vineyards Corp.District Court, E.D. California · 2009