Amanza SMITH, Petitioner,
v.
The SUPERIOR COURT of Los Angeles County, Respondent;
L'Oreal USA, Inc., Real Party in Interest.
Supreme Court of California.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
July 10, 2006.
July 10, 2006.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Steven S. Elster; Glancy, Binkow & Goldberg, Lionel Z. Glancy, Kevin F. Ruf, Avi Wagner, Los Angeles; Cyrus & Cyrus, Cyrus Nownejad, Beverly Hills; Law Offices of Steven Rubin and Steven Rubin, Beverly Hills, for Petitioner.
Rukin Hyland Doria & DuFrane and Peter Rukin, San Francisco, for California Employment Lawyers Association as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Petitioner.
Ivey, Smith & Ramirez, Jean-Claude André; Becky Lyn Monroe and Kevin Richard Kish for Bet Tzedek Legal Services, Asian Pacific American Legal Center of Southern California, Korean Immigrant Workers Advocates, La Raza Centro Legal and Stanford Community Law Clinic as Amici Curiae on behalf of Petitioner.
Steven S. Elster for Clergy and Laity United for Economic Justice as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Petitioner.
H. Thomas Cadell, Jr., San Diego, as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Petitioner.
Cynthia L. Rice and Julia Montgomery for California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation, Maintenance Cooperative Trust Fund, Legal Aid Society of Los Angeles, Legal Aid Society-Employment Law Center and Asian Law Caucus, Inc., as Amici Curiae on behalf of Petitioner.
No appearance for Respondent.
Morgenstein & Jubelirer, William J. Carroll, Bruce A. Wagman and Bita A. Karabian, San Francisco, for Real Party in Interest.
Sefarth Shaw, Kenneth D. Sulzer and Thomas R. Kaufman, Los Angeles, for American Staffing Association as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Real Party in Interest.
Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp and Lawrence A. Michaels, Los Angeles, for The Employers Group as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Real Party in Interest.
Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, Rex S. Henke and Jessica M. Weisel, Los Angeles, for New Avalon, Inc., as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Real Party in Interest.
Supreme Court of California.
BAXTER, J.
Section 201 of the Labor Code1 provides that if an employer "discharges" an employee, wages earned and unpaid at the time of discharge are due and payable immediately. Under section 203, an employer's willful failure to pay wages to a "discharged" employee in accordance with section 201 subjects the employer to penalties.
The question presented is whether the discharge element of these two statutes requires an involuntary...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
