From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Troester v. Starbucks Corp.

SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 29, 2018
5 Cal.5th 1092 (Cal. 2018)

Opinion

No. S234969.

08-29-2018

DOUGLAS TROESTER, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. STARBUCKS CORPORATION, Defendant and Respondent.


[Modification of opinion (5 Cal.5th 829, 235 Cal.Rptr.3d 820, 421 P.3d 1114), upon denial of rehearing.]

THE COURT. — The opinion herein filed July 26, 2018, is modified as follows:

The final paragraph of the majority opinion appearing at 5 Cal.5th 848 [advance report, 2d full par., lines 4, 8], is modified to read:

We hold that the relevant California statutes and wage order have not incorporated the de minimis doctrine found in the FLSA. We further conclude that although California has a de minimis rule that is a background principle of state law, the rule is not applicable to the regularly reoccurring activities that are principally at issue here. The relevant statutes and wage order do not allow employers to require employees to routinely work for minutes off the clock without compensation. We leave open whether there are wage claims involving employee activities that are so irregular or brief in duration that employers may not be reasonably required to compensate employees for the time spent on them.

The petition for rehearing is denied.


Summaries of

Troester v. Starbucks Corp.

SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 29, 2018
5 Cal.5th 1092 (Cal. 2018)
Case details for

Troester v. Starbucks Corp.

Case Details

Full title:DOUGLAS TROESTER, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. STARBUCKS CORPORATION…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Aug 29, 2018

Citations

5 Cal.5th 1092 (Cal. 2018)