From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hubbard v. Cnty. of L. A.

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jun 7, 2024
CV 23-3541 PA (RAOx) (C.D. Cal. Jun. 7, 2024)

Opinion

CV 23-3541 PA (RAOx)

06-07-2024

BRYAN HUBBARD, et al., Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, et al., Defendants.


JUDGMENT

In accordance with the Court's June 6, 2024 Minute Order granting, in part, the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by defendants County of Los Angeles and Anthony C. Marrone (collectively, “Defendants”), and denying plaintiff Bryan Hubbard and the 166 opt-in plaintiffs' (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) Motion for Relief, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED:

1. Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on Plaintiffs' FLSA claims for unpaid overtime wages;
2. Plaintiffs' claim for a writ of mandate is dismissed without prejudice;
3. Plaintiffs shall take nothing and Defendants shall have their costs of suit.

The Clerk is ordered to enter this Judgment.


Summaries of

Hubbard v. Cnty. of L. A.

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jun 7, 2024
CV 23-3541 PA (RAOx) (C.D. Cal. Jun. 7, 2024)
Case details for

Hubbard v. Cnty. of L. A.

Case Details

Full title:BRYAN HUBBARD, et al., Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, et al.…

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Jun 7, 2024

Citations

CV 23-3541 PA (RAOx) (C.D. Cal. Jun. 7, 2024)

Citing Cases

Vanorden v. ECP Optometry Servs.

See, e.g., Harrington v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store Inc., 713 F.Supp.3d 568, 586 (D. Ariz. 2024)…