Burgueno v. Epic Imports CA2/5

California Court of Appeal May 12, 2014 No. B240733MUnpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the appellant forfeited his challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence and the exclusion of evidence, but that the trial court erred by denying mandatory attorney fees under Labor Code section 1194 for the claims on which the appellant prevailed.

Issues

Whether the appellant forfeited his substantial evidence and evidentiary exclusion claims by failing to provide an adequate record and discuss conflicting evidence.
Whether the trial court erred in denying attorney fees for claims where the appellant prevailed on unpaid wages and overtime compensation under Labor Code section 1194.

Disposition. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Burgueno forfeited the first three contentions on appeal by failing to fully and fairly discuss conflicting evidence, properly cite to the record, and produce an adequate record.”

“section 1194, relied upon by Burgueno in the instant case, makes an award of attorney fees mandatory for a party prevailing on a claim of receiving less than the legal minimum wage or the legal overtime compensation applicable to an employee.”

“The trial court’s order denying attorney fees is reversed and the cause is remanded for the trial court to calculate reasonable attorney fees under Labor Code section 1194.”

Filed 5/12/14 Burgueno v. Epic Imports CA2/5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

LOUIS BURGUENO, No. B240733 (Consolidated w/B244936) Plaintiff and Appellant, (L.A. Super. Ct. No. BC430391) v.

EPIC IMPORTS, LLC, ORDER MODIFYING OPINION Defendant and Respondent. [NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT]

It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on May 9, 2014, be modified in the following particular: In the disposition on the last page, the allocation for the costs of appeal were omitted. Therefore, the last sentence of the disposition should be added to read: Parties to bear their own costs on appeal. There is no change in the judgment.

________________________________________________________________________ MOSK, Acting P. J. KRIEGLER, J.

Filed 5/9/14 Burgueno v. Epic Imports CA2/5 (unmodified version) Opinion following rehearing NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

Burgueno v. Epic Imports CA2/5

AI Brief

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

EPIC IMPORTS, LLC,

DISCUSSION

DISPOSITION

KRIEGLER, J.

AI Brief