In a misclassification class action alleged by a staffing company's service managers, CDF argued that multiple exemptions applied because they performed some duties that met the administrative exemption requirements, and performed other duties that met the managerial exemption requirements. CDF's extremely thorough investigation and deposition of the named plaintiff resulted in evidence not only of her criminal history but that she also had hired her criminal co-defendant while working as a service manager for the staffing company. After CDF's supplemental briefing distinguished the Sav-On case newly issued by the California Supreme Court, the judge denied class certification, which was upheld by the court of appeal.
Superior Court of California, County of Orange
California Courts of Appeal, 4th District Court of Appeal