From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Caldrone v. Circle K Stores Inc.

United States District Court, Central District of California
Feb 16, 2024
EDCV 21-749-GW-KKx (C.D. Cal. Feb. 16, 2024)

Opinion

EDCV 21-749-GW-KKx

02-16-2024

BRIAN CALDRONE, et al., Plaintiff, v. CIRCLE K STORES, INC., et al., Defendants.


JUDGMENT

HON. GEORGE H. WU, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Plaintiffs Brian Caldrone (domiciled in Florida), Galia Williams (domiciled in California), Joseph Celusta (domiciled in Ohio), and Kathleen Staats (domiciled in Florida) brought this lawsuit against Defendants CrossAmerica Partners LP (“CAPL,” a Delaware limited partnership) and Circle K Stores, Inc. (“Circle K,” a Texas Corporation) raising seven causes of action: (1) age discrimination under California's Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), Cal. Govt. Code §§ 12900 et seq.; (2) violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621 et seq.; (3) hostile work environment in violation of FEHA; (4) hostile work environment in violation of ADEA; (5) retaliation in violation of FEHA; (6) retaliation in violation of ADEA; and (7) violation of public policy.

CAPL and Circle K moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim. See ECF Nos. 13-14. The Court: (1) dismissed CAPL entirely from the action for lack of personal jurisdiction; (2) dismissed (without prejudice) the hostile work environment, retaliation, and public policy claims by Plaintiffs Caldrone, Celusta, and Staats against Circle K because those claims were based on events that occurred entirely outside of California and as to persons who are not California citizens by a Texas corporation and, hence, those claims had no connection to California; (3) allowed to proceed all of the Plaintiffs' age discrimination claims against Circle K that were based upon an allegedly discriminatory January 2020 hiring decision for the Circle K Director of West Coast Wholesale Fuels position in Corona, California (“Corona Position”); and (4) allowed Williams to proceed as to her seven causes of action against Circle K. See ECF Nos. 37, 40.

On August 8, 2023, Circle K's motion for summary judgment was granted in part and denied in part as follows: (1) summary judgment was granted in favor of Circle K as to all four Plaintiffs' claims of age discrimination under the ADEA and FEHA in regards to the 2020 selection for the Corona Position; (2) summary judgment was denied as to Williams' retaliation claims and corresponding request for punitive damages; and (3) summary judgment was granted as to Williams' remaining claims. See ECF No. 96. Thereafter, Williams reached a settlement with Circle K and “all” her claims against “all Defendants” were dismissed with prejudice with each party to bear their own attorney's fees and costs. See ECF No. 103.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED THAT: pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 54 and 58, JUDGMENT is rendered as to all claims in this matter consistent with the above delineated rulings of this Court.


Summaries of

Caldrone v. Circle K Stores Inc.

United States District Court, Central District of California
Feb 16, 2024
EDCV 21-749-GW-KKx (C.D. Cal. Feb. 16, 2024)
Case details for

Caldrone v. Circle K Stores Inc.

Case Details

Full title:BRIAN CALDRONE, et al., Plaintiff, v. CIRCLE K STORES, INC., et al.…

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Feb 16, 2024

Citations

EDCV 21-749-GW-KKx (C.D. Cal. Feb. 16, 2024)