Case5:11-cv-00455-LHK Document1-2 Filed01/28/11 Page1 of 15

~
" !

•
--

. ~

1
".'-

•
~KJ)'lIIhes.l Esg" BarNo. 210662
'~~8 '·HUG -ClONE APLC
. :2. :N~ Gateway Center
(J. '.19800 MacArthur Bl"d~, -8te. 290
.... 3 '~CA92612
"' .': Tel! ~/851-6300
4· :'Pax: 949/851-6301
S. ·.AUorDey.s for Plaintiff,
'MAIUJ\M TARZI
6 .

CONSOLIDATED SUPERIOR COURTS OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF ORANGE - CENTRAL DISTRICT

lO:MARlAMTARZI, an individual. )
)
CaseNo:
Judge:
O'lCC08999
... _
1t ',' ~ Plaintiff,
12 . '.. v.
..
) ~'(~UDGE RANDELL t. WIL1<INSOi\\?
~ Ie. DEPT. 025
13 .DA~ A. GAUNTLET!, dba ) COMPLAINT FOR: 1) FAILURE TO
14 oAtJm1.ETT & ASSOCIATES, a Sole ) PAY OVERTIME WAGES (LAB.
IS Pz9P~ietorship: DOES 1 through 500, ) CODE, §§ 1194, 1199); 2) FAlLURE
.~1\$ive
) TO PAY WAGES OF TERMINATED
) OR RESIGNED EMPLOYEES (LAB.
Defendants. CODE, §§ 20Vl03,1199); 3)
FAILURE TO PROVIDE REST
BREAKS AND MEAL PERIODS (Lab.
Code §§226.7 &. 512); 4) KNOWING
AND INTENTIONAL FAlLURE TO
zO. .' COMPLY WITH ITEMIZED
li EMPLOYEE WAGE STATEMENT
PROVISIONS (LAB. CODE, §'226(B);
22 5) VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR
2:3 COMPETITION LAW (BUS. &. PROF.
CODE, §§ 17200-17208); DEMAND
24 FOR JURY TRIAL
2S
26
Z7
is

.~EXHIBIT

III 2
~
 Case5:11-cv-00455-LHK Document1-2 Filed01/28/11 Page2 of 15

'.

1
•
Plaintiff alleges:
•
:2
PAR'flES
3
1. At all times herein mentionedp!aintift MARIAM.TARZI (hereiIJaftel:refurred
4
5 to as "plaintiff') was and is a resident ofthe County of Orange, State of California
6 2. Defendant. DAV1D A. GAUNnETT (hereinafter referred to as "defendant''),
1
S'
.at an times herein mentioned is a married man and a sole proprietor doing bus,iness as
. 9 ''GAUNTLETI' & ASSOCIATES" in the county of Orange, State of California.

10 AGENCX
11. 3. Plaintiff is unaware of the true names and capacities, whether corpotate.
t")
.- ass«:iiIte, individual, or otherwise. ofdefendants named as DOES I through X, inclusive.
13
14 Ptirsuant to Code o!Civil Procedure §474, Plaintiffwi1l seek leave of court to amend dus
15 CoziJptaint to sta.te said defendant's true names and capacities when the same have bfien

all.
16 ascenruned. Plaintiff is informed and believes and based upon such infonnatiolland belief
.17 . .
that said fictitiously-named defendants are resporulible for the payment of overtiine
18
l' ~usation and/or Labor Code § 203 penalties to the P\aintiffby virtue oftheirunlawiful

20. practices, and therefore sue thllSe deferulants by such fictitious names. Plaintiffwill am~d
21 this eompJaint to allege the true: names and capacities of the DOE Defendants when
2Z
aSciMained.
23
' . 4. Plalntiffis infonned and believes and upon such infonnation and belief aUdges
24
25 thatDefen~t, and each of them, at aU times herein mentioned were theagents, employees,
26 .'" 2 3
COMl'LAlNT fOR: I) FAILURE TO PAY OVERTIME WAGES (LAB. CODE, §§ 1194, 1199); 2) YA1LUU TO
27 I'AY.WAOES OF TllRMINATEP OR RESIGNBD BMPLOYBES (LAB. CODE, §§ 201-203, 1199); 3) FAI~I:Jru;
TO PROVIDE REST BReAKS AND MIlAL. PERIODS (\..ab. Cod! §§226.7 & 512); 4) KNOWING AND
28 1N1'ENTIOI'IAL fAILUIUlTO COMPLY WITH ITllMIZED BMPLOYElE WAGS STAT6MI!NT PltOVlstONS
(l.Alt CODE. § 226(8»; S) VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW (BUS. & PROF. CODE, §§
l'i2OQ.17208); DEMAND fOR JURY TRIAL

, .
 Case5:11-cv-00455-LHK Document1-2 Filed01/28/11 Page3 of 15

• •
•

I serv&nlS,jointVerlturers, andlor co-conspirators oftl:teremainingDefendant, and were actin~

'2
'3 In the course and scope ohuch agency, employment, joint venture, and/or conspiracy; that
4 'Defendant, and each of them, were doing the things herein alleged, were the actual andlJr

5 ostensible agents of the remaining defendants and Were acting within the course and scope
6 'of said agency; and that each and every defendAAt. as aforesaid, when acting as a principalI,
1
was negJigent in selecting, hiring, supervising and continuing the employment of each arid
8
9 every defendant IlS an agent, employee or joint venturer; and/or that said defendants

)0 appEOVed, supported, participated in, authorized, andlor ratified the acts.

11 FACTS
12
, '5. Plaintiff became employed by defendant as a file clerk in June of1998. Frdm
13
14 the'emile! ofber employment, defendant classified her as an "exempt" employee, earnin~ a
15 ~y salary of$3,200. At all times relevant, plaintiff's second line supervisurwas DaVid
16 A. Gauntlet! and her first line sllpervisor was Fiim Administrator, Najwa T. Kruzai.
17
6. In late 2000, in addition to her duties as defendant's file clerk., pJaintiff¢ilS
18
19 given additional job duties in that she began acting lIS defendant GauntJett's persobal

iO 'afiistant. As a result of the change in position, plaint\ff's desk Wll$ moved to a location
2~ diteetly outside of defendant Gauntlett's office thereby enabling him to monitor ~hat
22 ,,'
23' plaintiff was working On throughout the day. But for her file clerk ,duties, defendant

2:4 Gautitlett assigned plaintiff her daily and weekly list of projects to be completed. Some of
2S ,ttie, tilsks which, pJaintiff was assigned included, but were not limited to: creating :and
26 ,,' 3 '
"7' COi\ii'I>LAlNT FOR: I) FAILURE TO PAVO""BRTIMB WMISS (LAB. CODE, §§ tt94. II 99); 2) FAILUIUS TO
~ P~T 'IVAGES OF 1'6lWlNATED OR RBSIGNSD EMPLOYEES (LAB. CODE, §§ 201-203, 1199); 3) FAl1.lURli
28 1'0 PROVIDE JU!ST BREAKS AND M\!"L PERIOOS (tab. Code §§226.7 & 512); 4) J(,NOWlNG VlND
IN't'I1lI'lTlONAL FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH ITEMIZED SMl'LOi'13E WAGE STA1'IlMJlNT PROViSiONS
(LAS; CODE, § 2215(13»; S) VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMPETITION l,.AW (BUS. & PI!.OF. COD!;, §§
172iJO.112Q8); DEMAND FOR JURy TRIAL :
-, ,
 Case5:11-cv-00455-LHK Document1-2 Filed01/28/11 Page4 of 15

• •
1 updating new client flIes and indices for those files; updating the fum's calendar entri*
2
taking di¢1tion, transcribing, revising and proof-reading correspondence and other busineSs
3
4 related :documents; copying, fuxing and mailing correspondence and other business related
i
5 :docinnents; drafting, revising and proof-reading power point presentations; scheduling tra~1
6 aiTimgen1ents for fu'm staff; perfonning legal reselU'Ch; and compiling exhibits for submissi6n
7
to the llOurtS. In assigning these tasks, defendant Gauntlett set forth detailed instructions 'jm
8
9 bow ei.oh one was to be completed. On many occasions, defendant Gauntlett required that
10 plaintiff work late hours, on holiday and weekends to complete her assigned tasks.
11 .: ····7. In addition to the tasks set forth above, as part of her "exempt" duties
12
deftm1ant Gauntlett assigned plaintiff to: baby-sit his daughter; take his mother to medital
13
14 appc:iIiitments; drive him to and from the ailport and/or office from his residence; reseatch
]5 '~es for wine, antiques, art lind glass he desired to make as. well as related shippIng
16 laWs for areas he 'intended to visit to purchases such items; organize personal files for hlm,
11
his Wife, family and friends; translate emaHs so that he could commUnicate with fiunily in
18
19 fi'an&l; schedule his DMV and car inspection/repair appointments; xesearch cell phones end

20 pfIUIs' for he and his mother; order and picked up his contact lenses; schedule all of'his
21niedkal, gym and hair appointments; pickup the fum's grocery supplies and his persdmil
22
lundies; seateh for, roount and purchase frames for his certificates; researched his daught&r's
2j
14 scbtJ;01 calendar and plan his trips accordingly; transcribe his daughter's personal daily

2S iiclt~ules; transcribed his Christmas list and description of items to be purchased; located
26 .. . 4 ;
COMl'LAINT fOR: 1) FAILURE TO PAY OVERTlMB WAGES (LAB, CODB, §§ 1194, 1199); 2) I'A1LUl\!'i TO
21 PAYWAGBS OF 'l'llRMINATllD OR RESIGNED I!MPLOYn;S (LAB. COOg, §§ 201-2G3, 1\99); 3) FAll!URE
. Tb P'ltOVlDB REST 8RliAKS AND MEAL PEliODS (Lab. Code §§22li.1 & S12); 4) KNOWING lAND
28 INtENTIONAL FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH ITEMIZED BMPLOYEBWAGB STATllM£NT PROViSioNS
_ CODE, § 226(8); 5) VIOLATIONS OF nIB UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW (nUS. & PROF. COP~. §§
1'7200-172.08); IJI!MAND FOR JURY TRJAL
 Case5:11-cv-00455-LHK Document1-2 Filed01/28/11 Page5 of 15

.,
•
I giftp\l«hasesandt:onf\lUledavailabilitytoupdatelist;
-
•
wrappedms giftpurchases;delivered.
2
rmUl or other documents to his residence; coordinated meals -withhls privatechet; wends and
3 '
4 fmnily to ensure that the menu selection was acceptable for those who joined him on triP~
- I
5 scheduled traveilltTangements for his friends and family; located non-business restauran*

6 -and Mots for he, his family and frien~, to attend wbile tra.veling; creating travel itinewids
7
,_ .for he, his family and friends containing maps, directions, car rental and flight infutmatio*,
9 train schedules and Euro-railway schedules. various activities, weather reports.

10 8. As a result ofthe nwnerous and diverse tasks PlaintiffwlIS required to perfor!n

,
11. tIY'defendant G.aunt/en, Plaintiff did not take rest periods, often did not take a lunch, &r
12
WoUlcieal at her desk. When Plaintiffdid leave the office on a "luneh break," she often spe~t
~ ,
14 -the·tntirety of her breaks running personal errands for defendant Gauntlett. PlaintiifworkM

is oVenbne on a daily basis to meet defendant Gauntlett's demanding needs and deadlines:
j
16 9. Plaintiffhad no decision making authority regarding any ofthe finn's polic!es
11
tSOr·procedures. She had no managerial authority. Thus she was not involved in the hlrittg,

19 dI~line (unless, of course, instructed by defendant Gauntlett to send an e-mail to a sM

20' mem1>er or attorney reprimanding himlher). reviews, raises or termination decisi~ns

21 ~ing any of defendant's employees.

10. On May 10,2007, plaintiff provided defendant Gauutlett a letter reg~g

24 wiiai she reasonably believed to be his choice to mis-classifY her as an "exempt" emplojee.
25 _She'r.:quested payment for her unpaid overtime hours. Wben plaintiff returned to workisbe
26 _ 5
COMl'LAJNT fOR: I) FAILURE TO PAY OVERTIME WAGES {LAB. COOl!, §§ 1194, 1-199); 2) FAILURll TO
21. PAY'wAGES OF TERMiNATED OR RESIGNED EMPLOYEES (LAB. CODE, §§ 201-203, 1199); 3) FAJliURE
...... 'ro'fROV1DE REST BlffiAKS AND MEAL PERIODS (Lab. Code §§216.7 &. 512); 4) KNOWING i>.ND
.... IN1'I!NTiONAL FAILURE TO <;OMPLY WITH ITBMIZEP EMPLOYEE WAGE STATEMl!NT PROViSiONS
(lS.. CODE, § 226(8»; 5) VIOLAnONS OF THE UNFAIRCOMPETlTION LAW (BUs. & PROF. COD¥. §§
1'120IH7208); DaMANO FOIUUItY TIUAL !

I
I
 Case5:11-cv-00455-LHK Document1-2 Filed01/28/11 Page6 of 15

, .
• •
1 lea:rn~ that aU of her stored email communications, over 3000, bad been deleted from h~r
2 ' ,
'work. Gomputer. Plaintiff immediately brought this to the attention of defendant!s
3
4 TeclID&logy Manager who stated that he knew nothing about the missing documents, He

s lOoked at plaintif'f's computer and did, however, confirm that someone had changed h~r
, 6 settinp and deleted of her stored e-mails. Plaintiff then advised' defendant Gauntlett thiat
7
f sorn#Orlehad logged into her computer, manipulated the settings and deleted 5eve~al

9 1h0USlind a-mails. Defendant Gauntlett had 00 response.

10 11. On May 14, 2007, after no written or verbal response to her demand for
11 overtime compensation, Plaintiff gave her resignation. On May 17, 2007, defendlint
12
Gauntlett responded to plaintiffs resignation letter, by stating: "Preliminary, I would lik~to
13
14 dthat the firm absohitely disputes your claim for overtime wages." On May 25, 2007~he
IS Sent 8. follow up letter again stating that Plaintii'fwas not entitled to overtime wages. .
Hi ...... 12. Plaintiff eStimates that the total number of straight overtime hours worIkd
11
betWten August 15,2003 aIld May 14,2007 to be in excess of 1131 hours. Duri!1g this ssbe
IS
19 iirtteperiod, plaintiff estimates thatthenumber ofhours worked over 1Zin a given work liay

20 and/or on legal. holidays to be in excess of 117. Within this time period, plaintiff also
21 eiiti'ftiates that the total number of days wherein plaintiff was either forced to pennon w'ork
22
. nihtlitd tasks or personal ventures for defendantGauntlett during her designated meal periods
23 ,
24 Of sianply could not take a lunch at all was in excess of 567. Finally. plaintiff estimates (tha.t

25 .tIi'C -total number of missed rest breaks was in excess of 1512. To date, and despite: her
26.. 6 ,
CQMI>LAlNT FOR; I) FAILURE TO pAY OVERTIME WAGES (LAB. coos, §§ 1194, 1199); 2) FAILURE 10
27
23
''''1 WAGES OF TER¥lNATED OR RESIGNED BMPLOYEES (tAB. CODE, §§ 201-203,1199); 3) FAIIluru;.
W' l!ROVlDB 'REST BREAKS AND MEAL PERIODS (Lab. Code §§226.7 &. 512); 4) KNOWING lAND
Il!I1SNTIONAL FAiLURE TO COMPLY WIT» ITEMIZED EM'PLOYt!E WAGE STATEMENT PROVIS ONS
~. CODE, § 226(8»; 5) VIOLATIONS OFTiffi UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW (BUS. &. !'ROF. coDE. §§
112rJO.17208); DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL ;
 Case5:11-cv-00455-LHK Document1-2 Filed01/28/11 Page7 of 15

• •
1 denw\ds, plaintiff has not received any reimbursement for overtime hoUl'S, meal breaks, cit
2
milage reimbursement.
3
4. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
Failure to Pay Overtime Wages (Lab. Code, §§ l"l94, 1199)
S ,
6, 13. Plalntiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 12 of this complaint as if fuliy

7 alleged herein,
8, ~
)4. During the Liability Period, whioh is defined as four years prior to the filirlg
9
ofthi$"complaint, overtime compensation was required, including but not limited to attkr
10
11 ~et Qr both eight (8) hours of work in one (I) day or forty (40) hours in one week,

12 ~ upon which Wage Order or statute was in effect. Further, the lawful requiremdnt
13 tI!at the defendant pay overtime compensation was not subject to a reduction or varidus
14
e1Ceeptions, such as an alternative woo.week allowing excessive or non-traditional wclrk
IS
16 houns, such as described inLabur Code §§51O and 51l, or the applicable Wage Orders.
17 , 15. Plaintiff was a non-exempt employee covered under one or more IndusttiiaJ

~rnia regulation and statute, and plaintiffwas not subject to an exemption for execut~\re,

21 aijrnfuistrative and professional employees, which imposed an obligation on the part of!~e
,
22 ~dant to pay the Plaintiff' lawful overtime compensation. As such, Plaintiffis ame~ber

23 o-(iht class of persons for whose protection said statute was enacted liS an employee}md
24
2S 'iletdldant is a member of the class of entities whose wrongful conduct said statute ~as

26 7
COMPLAINT FOR: 1) "AlLURE TO PAY OVERTIMEWAOSS (!.AB. CODIl. U 1194. 1199); l) FAILURE TO
27 "PAT WAGES OFTERM1NA"\'ED OR ReSIGNBD EMPLOYEES (I..A~. CODE, §f 201-203, 1199); 3)FAlll'tnul
" ",' TO f,ROVIOO REST BREAKS MlD MEAL l'ERlOOS (Lab. Code §§lU.7 &. 51l); 4} KNOWING ~ND
as· IJIi'I'SNTIONAL FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH l'l'EMIZI!D EMPLOYEE WAGE STATEMeNT PROVIsiONS
(lA!l CODB. § 2:l6(B); 5) VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMl'STlTION LAW (SUS. & PROF. CODE. §§
1.~-1?20S); DEMANO FOR JURY TRIAL

~ '.
 Case5:11-cv-00455-LHK Document1-2 Filed01/28/11 Page8 of 15

• J

• •
1 enacted to prevent as an employer.
2
16. By Virtue ofthe conduct set forth in paragraphs 5 through 12 above; defendaht
3
4 \1oJak:a said statute in that plaintiff' primarily performed non-exempt work in excess of ~e
,
S trlaximum regular rate hours set by the IWe in the above Wage Orders, regUlations 6r
6 statntew.
7. As a direct and proximate result of said statutoI)' violation, Plaintiffsustain~d
17.
s·· ""
9 ewnoitllc damages accor<ling to proof, plus pre-judgment interest thereQn.

10 18. Plaintiffis further entitled tostatutoryattowey's fees andcostsofsuitputsuant

Ii toLilb. Code §1l94.
,
12
19. Plaintiff is further entitled to statutory penalties pUrsuant to Labor Code §sl5!l,
13
'. '·20. Defendant acted with malice, fraud and" oppression towaTd Plaintiff and Jith
14
lS ~ous disregard' of he~ rights and PlairJtiff is accordingly entitled to punitive and
i

16 C)j;~lary damages against defendant in sums sufficient to punish hitnand set an el1am~le .
11
in vieW of his finllllcial condition.
18
]9 . SECOND CAUSE Of AcnON
Failure to Pay Wages ofTenninated or Resigned Employees
20 (Lab. Code, §§ 201-203,1199)
21
21. Plaintiff inl'lotporate paragrapbs 1 through 12 of this complaint as if rluly
2Z
23- aueged herein.
,!
24 22. Labor Code §201 provides that all wages and benefits are payable withib 72

is hOms if an employee resigns without notice or, on last day of Illtlploy when notice is ~ven
26·.··__ I,
·
it'.
-g ,
,
I

27 COMf'LAINT FOR: I) FAILURE 'ro PAY OVERTIM.!! WAGES (LAB. CODE, §§ 1194, 1l99); Z) I'A1LURiE TO
PAY,YJAOBS OF TERMINATED OR RESIONED BMPLOVEES (LAB. CODE, §§ 201-203, \199);3) FA(~U/{E
"'8 'rC)·I'R.OVlDE llEST BREAKS AND MEAL PERIODS (Wi. cOde §§226.7 &; SIZ); 4) KNOWINO·fAND
~ INTENTIONAL FAILURE TO COMPLY wrrn ITEMIZED BMPLOYEE WAGE STA-reMENT PROVISIONS
.' (LA.Ek CODE, § 126(B)}; 5) VIOLAnONS OF THE IJNJ'AIR COMPETITION LAW (BUs. & PItOF. COq'S, §§
1'1211O·17208);DEMANO POR JURY TRlAL
 Case5:11-cv-00455-LHK Document1-2 Filed01/28/11 Page9 of 15

• •
1: more 1han 72 hours in provided advance. Labor Code §204 el. seq. states that labpr
2
petfonued between the first and tbe fifteenth days of the month. shall be paid for between
3
4 tile sDtteenth and twenty sixth day of that same month and labor perfor.r;ned between the

5 si~ and the last day of the month shall be p.i.id between the first and tenth of the
6 folloWing month. Labor Code §202 defines the term "wages" to include "all amounts tor
1,,;ra..a.- Jlerformed by employees of every description, whether the amount is fixed' or

9. .. ~jned by the standard of time, task, piece, commission basis, or other method' of

10 CtdQulatj.on." Labor Code §2DO(a) .includes bonuses as a category of wages.

11 23.
I
Plaintiff is a member of the class ofpersons for whose protection said statute
12
was<enacted as an employee and defendant is a member of the class err entities whose
13.
14 ~conduct said statute was enacted to prevent as an employer.

IS 24. By Virtue ofthe conduct set forth in paragrapbs 5 through 12 above, defendant
lij. violM:ed said statute in that the defendant required the plaintiff to work overtime wit~out
11
lawful compensation, in violation ofthevarlous above applicable Wage Orders, regulations
13
19. bchtatutes, and the defendant wiilfully failed and refused, PI,ld continues to fail and refuse
20 to PAy wages promptly when due upon termination of plaintiff's employment.
. 21 25. As a direct and proximate result of said violation, plaintiff is entitle'd to
.. i
22
~tory penalties in the amount of 30 days of wages pursuant to Labor Code §203. i
23'
24 26. Plaintiffis further entitled to an award of statutory attorney's fees and co~ts of
l5 S1.lit pursuant to Lab. Code §1194.
26. ,'. I. 'f
9 •
r• i

COIi!l'LAINT FOR; I) FAILURE TO PAY OVERTIME WAGES (L.AB. CODE. §§ lt94, 1199); 2) FAILURE TO
27 pAy WAGES OF TERMINATED OR RESIGNED 'EMPLOYEES (LAB. CODB. §§ 20H03, 1199;; 3) FAILURB
'rO·.PROVIDE REST BREAKS AlIID MEAL. F6Rl0DS (Lab. (lode §§~6.7 & 512)\ 4) KNOWING Ai/O
a' l!fl'£NTIONAL FAlLUM TO COMPL)' Wl1'H ITBMIZl!D EMPLOYEE W!;.GB ST!;'1'EMllNT PROVISIONS
a.M. COPE. § l26(B»; S) vtOL.ATtONS OF ms UNFAIR COMPBTlTl0N LAW (BUs. & FRO!'. COPE, §§
11200-112011); DEMAND FOR JURy TRIAL i
.. ,
 ,
, ..
"'.
"

Case5:11-cv-00455-LHK Document1-2 Filed01/28/11 Page10 of 15

..
1 'J.7.
• •
Defendant acted . 'th malice, fraud and oppression toward Plaintiff and with
!

2 consdous disregard of her ri~ts lind Plaintiff isa.ccordlngJy entitled to punitive a~

:. :. ~lilry damages against defendant in sums sufficient to punish him and set an examble
5 fa _ofb" __ "'""±'
6 '. . mrRD CAUSE OF ACTION
7 Failure to Provide Rest Breaks and Meal Periods
(Lab. Code §§226.7 & 512)
8
9 28. Plaintiff ineoXl' rate paragrapbs I through 12 of this complaint as if rully
10 alleged herein.
11
29. Labor Code §22 .7 provides that "No employer shall require any employeb to

:: .~ during any meal orres! period mandated by an applicable order of the IndusJnal
14 W~ Commission." Like wise, Labor Code §512 states that "An employer may!not
15 .by an employee f~i work period of more than five hours per~da:y without providinJ, the
16
employee with. a meal period fnot less than 3'0 minutes•...An employer may not emplo~ an
. 17
]8: employee for work period of bm;e than ten hours per-day without providing the empl~yee
19' with a second meal period 1f not less thai!' 30 minutes. Every employer shall rukher
20' aiidIorize and pennit all emp!byees to take rest periods at the rate often minutes per ho~r or
21
~r fraction thereof.
:2.2
30. By virtue ofth conduct set forth in paragraphs 5 tlJrough 12 above, defendant
23'
24 ~ted said statute in that it ailed or refused provide plaintiffwith the rest periods or inea!
25 bmiks as statutorily require .
2i 10
PLAINT FOR; I) FAlLUll.E Tb PAVOVERTlME WAOES·(LAB. CODE, §§ 1194, 1199); 2) FAILURE TO
1.1 pA~ WAGEs OF TERMINATED diR RF..8laNED EMPLOYEES (LAB. CODE, §§ 201-203, 1199); 3) FAILURE
..;t to"JPROV\DE REST BREAKS AND MeAL PllRlODS (lAb. Cod<> §§226.7 &. 512); 4) KNOWfNd AND
&;0 I'KmNTIONAL FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH ITEMIZED EMPLOYE!! WAGE 5TATEMBNT PROVlSlONS
~. CODE. § 216(B»; 5) VloL.j\nONS OF rilE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW (BUS. & PROP. cobE. ~§
lmo-17208); DEMAND FOR JUH.Y TRIAL :
 Case5:11-cv-00455-LHK Document1-2 Filed01/28/11 Page11 of 15

1 31.
• •
As a direct and pro1(imate result of said violation, plaintiff is entitled ~
i

2 ' '
IiIatII.tOIy penalties pursuant to Labor Code §:5S8 plus statutory penalties equivalent tio
3, . . f'
4 'paymel1t for an additional hour of pay at plaintiffs' regular rate of compensation for ea~h
,
5 work day that a rest period was not provided and for each day a meal period was uht
6 pi'ovided,
!
7
,:., 32. Defendant acted wIth malice, fraud and oppression toward plaintiff and wi~
g: , !
9 jllOlJSOitlus disregard of his rights and plaintiff is accordingly entitled to punitive Jd
i ~

10 ,exeniplmy damages against defendant in sums sufficient to punish it and set an e1Ullllpie lin
. 1
Ii \liew Of its financial condition. '
12
FOl.JlITH CAUSE OF ACTION
-, 13, Knowing and Intentional Failure to Comply
14 with Itemized Employee Wage Statement Provisions (Lab. Code, § Z2iJ(B))
i
1$ 33. Plaintiff incorporate paragraphs 1 through 12 of thls complaint as if tu;lly
t6 '.,,'alICSen herein.
• 17 , ,
18, 34. Labor Code §226 provides that at the time wages are paid. or semimontl}ly,
19, ;~~er oCcurs flf8t. every California employer must pro~ide a statement jdenti1;ying ~e
~' 'tb~ng; grosswagos eluned; total hours worked; all deductions made; h01.ll'ly rate orJay;
b ~,' , I
, 22 'net wages earned; inclusive datesofth.e pay period; name l\nd social security number ofJtbe

i3 emplOyee; name and address of the legal entity which is the employer.
24 35. Defendanthaveknowingly and intentionally failed to comply with Labor O:ode

2S seelion 22~(a) on each and eVery wage statement provided to PlalntUf.

26 '11 ;
~LAlNT FOlt: 1) FAILlJRE TO PAV OVERTIME wAGES (LAS. CODE, §§ 1194, 1199); 2) FA'LU~ TO
27, PI>YWAOES or TERMINATED OR RESIONED EMPLOYEES (LAB. COPE. §§201·203. 1199); 3} fAJIlURll
.... 'TO PROVIDE REST BREAKS AND MEAL PERIODS (Lab. Code §~22~7 & 512); 4) I{NOWTNG lAND
~v .JNTENnONAl. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH ITEMIZED EMPLOYlSB WAOll STAtEMENT PROVISiONS
~ CODE, §'Zi6(B»; S) VIOLATIONS OF THE UNfAIR COMPETITION LAW (BUS. &. PROF. COD!;' §§
1noo..l7203); DEMAWD FOR JURY 'fRIAL i

I
1
Case5:11-cv-00455-LHK Document1-2 Filed01/28/11 Page12 of 15

• •
" ,

• - I·

I, 36. As a direct and pro){imate result of said violation, Plaintiff is entitledito

2 ;: , i'
:r !!ItatutGlY penalties, each in the amount of$250 for the initial violation and $1,000 for eath
i
4 ~lation occurring iliereafter pursuant to Labor Code §226.3 plus statutory penalties in ~e
I, "'

S ~t of $4-,000 pursuant to Labor Code §226.

6' : 37. Plaintiff is further entitled to an award of statutorY attorney's fees and co~ts
7: . ' !
":: !pumumt to Lab. Code §226.
8", '
y; ., 38. Defendant acted wiili malice, fraud and oppression toward Plaintiff and ~itlI

10' :,conscioUs disregard of her rights and PJaintlff is accordingly entitled to punitive ~
11 i exemplary damages against defendant in sums sufficient to punish him ami set an cxmdple
12
hr'Yi~w ofltis financial condition.
13
14 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Violations ufilie Unfair Competition Law
15/ (Bus. & Prof. Code, §§ 17200-17208)
15i
39. Plamtiff incorporate paragraphs] thwugb 12 oftltis complaint as if ~lIy
11!
18/ BlieIed herein. i
1~! 40. Section 17200 of the California Business and Professions Code prohibitsl any
2Qi' Wuawful, unfair or fraudulent business act or practice.
2t !
~: .. .' 41. By virtue ofilie conductset fortb in paragraphs 5 through 12 above, Defe~ant
~. '_cd in an unlawful, unfait and fraudulent business practice in violationofClllif~mla
.,
24: Business and ProfessiOns Code § 17200.
2~: Iii ,
z.: 12
.. COMPLAIN1' POR: 1JFA IJ.,URE TO Pi\.Y OVERTIME WAGES (UB. CODB, §§ 1194, 1199); 2} FAILURE TO
i
2~': PAy. WAGES onJ;:RMtN ATED OR RESIGNED EMPLOYEES (LAB. CODE, §§ 20 1-203, 1199); 3) I'AriLU/lE
, T(), PROVIDE REST BREAKS AND MEAL PERIODS (Ls.b. CQde §§226.7 &. 512); 4} !<NOWING! AND
1l4'f.ENTIONAL FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH ITEM\.ZBD EMPl..OYEE WAGE STATIlMENT PROVISIONS'
••1 {LAI3. CODE, § 2Z6(B»: 5) VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMPETITION U W (BUS. &. PROF. CO$t;. U
1~o-l7208): DEMAND FOIUUR.Y TR.IAL :

I•
I
 Case5:11-cv-00455-LHK Document1-2 Filed01/28/11 Page13 of 15

1.
. .

42.
• •
By virrue ofthe conduct set forth in paragraphs 5 through 12 above, defen~ant

2 :engated in policies and pl:3ctices that have hanned Plaintiff, as well as the general publi~in
3 .. ,
4 : ~the failure to pay lawful overtime pay compensation to Plaintiff, and timely paYi all
i
s. ·ovenime compensation due upon termination ofp(aintiff's employment and to keep pr~per

6' rec:aEtls as alleged herein, constitutes an unlawful and unfair business practice
.
withinithe
,
7' . . :
~ "mearung of Business and Professions Code §17200, et seq. including but not limited ~o a

9. violation ofilie applicabJe State ofCalifornia Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Or4eis,
10 .ations and statutes, or is oilie;wise a pl:3ctice which is otherWise unfair and unlavffill,
11 inclUding that the defendant did Dot pay tax contributions on the accrued overtime·
12.; . . i
cOitlPensation in the fonn ofFICA, Social Security, Medicareand UnemploymentIns\Jl'lI.!lce.
d.
14 43. 'This cause ofaction is brought as a cumulatiV'eremedy as provided in Busihess
!

15 arid·Professions Code §11205, and is intended as an alternative remedy for restitutlo~ for
~J
ptailltiff for the time period, or any portion thereof, conunencing within four (4) years prior
11! '
I
l~ t6"tJk filing of this complaint, and as the primary remedy for plaintiff for the time peridd of
191 tbe:rourth year prior to the filing ofthis complaint.
20! 44.
. I
As a result ofilie Defendant's unlawfUl and unfair business practice of ~llng
. 21: to fi8y overtime and prompt payment of wages in violation of California's Labor Jaws,
lil
g: Pl'liintiff suffered loss ofwages and is entitled to restitution· in an amount according to ph,of.
241 45. Plaintiffls also entitled to an award ofreasonableattomeys' fees pU1S1ldnt to

~ Ci!1ifornia Code of Civil Procedure §102L5. i

~.,' ,. 13 i
~PLAJ1'lT !lOR: l) l'AILURB'TOPAV OVERTIME WAOES (LAB. CODE, §§ 1194, 1199); 2) FAILURETO
2" fA'" WAGES 01' TERMINATED OR RESIGNED EMPLOYEES (LAB. coos, §§ 201.203, 1199); 3) FAiLURE

~
'i'Q·\'PROVIDE REST BReAKS .ANDMBAL PeRlODS (L3b. Code '§§:22~.1 II< 512); 4) KNowrnd ANP
!Ntan'IONAL FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH ITEMIZED EMPLOYEE WAOE STATEMENT PI\.OVISIONS
":! (fiiJ3. CODE, § 220(9»; S) VIOLATIONS OF THE UNFAIR COMPETmON I.AW (BUS. & PROF. COPE. §§
·lmo·mOS); DEMAND fOR JURY TRIAL i
.j
,
I
;
.!
 Case5:11-cv-00455-LHK Document1-2 Filed01/28/11 Page14 of 15

•
r

. ..-i
•

• •
1 ':~ORE, plaintiff prays judgement against both defendant as follows:
2 d
As to the First. Second and Fourth Causes of Action Only:
3
1. For economic damages, according to proof;
4. .i

S ~.~ 2. For statutory penalties;

;..:
6 > 3. For statutory attorney's fees;
)
7 .,
; 4. For prejudgment interest;
a .,,.=
5. For cost of suit; and
9 !
10 ,.l:~·' 6. For punitive damages .
!
11
12
I As to the Third Cause ofAction Only:

L For statutory penalties;

13 ,
14 i 2. For cost of suit; and

IS 3. For punitive damages.

Hi As to the Fifth Cause of Acti,on Only:
17
1. Restitutionary damages;
13
19 2. Reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of this action; and
20, 3. For prejudgment interest.
21. III
22·
i3 III
24' III
25' III
..
. .. '. 14
COiiiAINT FOR: I} FAlWRE TO PAY OVERTIME WAGES (LAB. CODE, §§ 1194, 1199); 2) FAILtiRB TO
PAY WAGES OF TERMINATED OR RESIGNED BMPLOYllBS (LAB. CODE, §§ 201.20~, 1199); 3) FAILlJRB
1'0 "ROVIDE REST BREAI<S AND MEAL PERIODS (Lob. Code §§226.7 &. 512); 4) KNOWING AND
1i'ITIINTtONAL FAIWltE TO COMPLY WlTI:lI1"EMlZaD EMPLOYlie WAOE STATilMEm PROVISIOl-lS
~ CODE, § 226(6); 5) VlOLA110NS OF THE tJNFAIRCOMPBTlTION LAW (Bt,JS. &; PROF. CODE, §§
1'1200-17208); DEMAND FORJ1JRY T~tAL

..
: " --- .... ..--
'
 Case5:11-cv-00455-LHK Document1-2 Filed01/28/11 Page15 of 15

• 1
•
As to All Causes of Action:
•
:2
1. Any additional relief the CQlIrt deems proper.
3
4
s
6
7
g; ,.I>llted: August 15,2007
By:
9.
10 r Plaintiff .

It
12
13 DEMAND FQR JURY TRIAL
14
. . Plaintiff, MARIAM TA.RZI does hereby demand trial of her claims by jury to the
15
16 ex1erIt authorl~d by law.
11
:: .-
18 HUGHES-ClONE, APLC
19
itl
. Dated: August 15, 2007
21 By:
22
23
24
25
26 .~... 15
.. COJIW>LAINTFOJ\.} 1) PAlLURE TO PAY OVERTIME WAGES (LAB. COOS. §§ 1194. \199); 2) FA1WR£ TO
27 PltY.'JIAOES Of TERMiNA'fEO OR RESIGNED EMPLOYEES (LAB. CODE, §§ 201-203, 1199); l) FAlLUKI!
2$ 10 fRaVIDB REST BREAKS AND Ji.lBAI. PElUQDS (Lab. CDde §§2l6.1 8< 512); 4) KNOWll-jG AND
INTI!NTIONAL fAILUJl:E TO COMPLY WITH ITEMIZED EMPLOYEll WAGE STATEMENT PROVISIONS
(J...A8. CODE, § 226(8));» VIOLATIONS OF nJEUNJ'AIRCOMl'ETITlON LAW (Sus. & PROF. CODE, §§ .
1'1200-17208); DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
...

.;
, ., ;~-