> >
Case Name | John Futrell et al. v. Payday California, Inc., et al. | |
---|---|---|
Date | 12/16/2010 | |
Note | A class action suit against a payroll company for unpaid overtime and other wages failed because the payroll company was not his employer, the 2nd District Court of Appeal concluded in a published opinion. | |
Citation | B215110 | |
WCC Citation | WCC 36962010 CA |
Between July and December 2008, Payday and Futrell filed arguments, evidence and evidentiary objections on the issue of whether Payday had been Futrell's employer. Futrell submitted his own declaration attesting he "understood" he was a Payday employee because of the payroll documents that Payday processed, and because representatives of Payday made statements to that effect. The pay stubs provided with Futrell's paychecks identified Futrell as the "employee" and identified Payday as the "employer of record. "Payday did not and could not hire or fire Futrell, nor did Payday have any control over Futrell's work activities. Our references to "Payday" include Payday California, Inc. , Screaming Eagle, Inc. , Payday LA, Inc. , Payday Management, Inc. , and PDSI, Inc. .
Download full case here.
Download full case here.