Joe’s Pizza on Sunset Faced Overtime Pay and Minimum Wage Violation Allegations
/California pizza delivery driver sues for overtime and minimum wage pay violations and wins but ends up seeking an appeal when the trial court denies the attorney fees and costs request.
The Case: Gramajo v. Joe's Pizza on Sunset, Inc.
The Court: California Court of Appeals, Second District, Eighth Division
The Case: 03-25-2024
The Plaintiff: Gramajo v. Joe's Pizza on Sunset, Inc.
The plaintiff in the case, Gramajo, worked as a pizza delivery driver for Joe's Pizza from February 2014 to June 2015. In February 2018, Gramajo sued Joe's Pizza for failure to pay minimum and overtime wages, citing multiple California Labor Code violations.
The Defendant: Gramajo v. Joe's Pizza on Sunset, Inc.
The defendant in the case, Joe's Pizza on Sunset, Inc., faced numerous employment law violation allegations in the case including:
Failure to pay minimum and overtime wages (Lab. Code, §§ 510, 558, 1194)
Failure to provide rest and meal periods (Lab. Code, §§ 512, 226.7)
Failure to pay wages due (upon termination) (Lab. Code, §§ 201, 202, 203)
Failure to reimburse for business expenses (Lab. Code, § 2802)
Unfair business practices (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200).
The Case: Gramajo v. Joe's Pizza on Sunset, Inc.
The trial for Gramajo v. Joe's Pizza on Sunset, Inc. was set after close to four years of litigation and discovery, with Gramajo seeking $26,159.33 in unpaid minimum and overtime wages, missed meal and rest breaks, waiting time penalties, and unreimbursed expenses. After completing a seven-day trial, the jury found in favor of Gramajo on both the minimum wage and overtime causes of action and awarded Gramajo $2.17 in unpaid minimum wages and $3,340 in unpaid overtime wages. In total, Gramajo recovered:
$7,659.63 (of unpaid minimum and overtime wages)
$2,115.59 in statutory interest
$2,100 in waiting time penalties (at a daily wage rate of $70 per day for thirty days according to Labor Code section 203)
$2.17 in liquidated damages
$100 in statutory penalties
Following the verdict, Gramajo moved for attorney fees totaling $296,920 and $26,932.84 in costs. The trial court denied Gramajo's fee request, granting Joe's Pizza's motion to tax costs, ultimately awarding Gramajo nothing, claiming the plaintiff acted in bad faith by inflating his damages figure, including claims he had no intention to pursue to justify the filing of an unlimited civil proceeding. The trial court also argued that the case was severely over-litigated.
Seeking Attorney Fees and Costs On Appeal: Gramajo v. Joe's Pizza on Sunset, Inc.
On appeal, the plaintiff argued the law entitled him to reasonable litigation costs (Labor Code section 1194, subdivision (a)) and that the trial court abused its discretion when turning to Code of Civil Procedure section 1033, subdivision (a), to support their denial of his litigation costs. The appeals court found the plaintiff was entitled to an award of reasonable litigation costs (Labor Code section 1194, subdivision (a)), and denying all costs by relying on Code of Civil Procedure section 1033, subdivision (a) was in error. The order denying the plaintiff's motion for attorney fees and costs and granting the defendant's motion to tax costs was reversed and remanded to the trial court. The trial court will determine a "reasonable" attorney fee and costs award for the plaintiff. The appellate court did not express an opinion on the reasonableness of the plaintiff's attorney fees and costs requests or whether or not the case should have been filed in limited jurisdiction.
If you need to discuss filing a California employment law complaint, contact Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP for guidance. Their seasoned employment law attorneys can assist you from their San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago offices.