In Furry v. East Bay Publishing, the Court held that imprecise evidence by an employee can provide a sufficient basis for damages when the employer fails to keep accurate records of the employee’s work hours, but an employee is not entitled to premium or regular pay for missed meal breaks if he cannot show the employer knew, or should have known, he was working through authorized meal breaks. Plaintiff sued his former employers, for, among other things, unpaid overtime wages, meal and rest break compensation, and statutory penalties for inaccurate wage statements. Although the trial court found that defendant failed to keep accurate records of the work hours, it concluded that plaintiff was not entitled to any relief because his testimony was too uncertain to support a just and reasonable inference that he performed work for which he was not paid. The trial court also found that plaintiff was provided with uninterrupted meal and rest breaks as required by law. The Court of Appeal found error and reversed. It held that it was error to completely deny relief on overtime claim, because imprecise evidence by an employee can provide a sufficient basis for damages when the employer fails to keep accurate records of the employee’s work hours. The Court, however, stated that plaintiff was not entitled to premium or regular pay for missed meal breaks because he failed to demonstrate that defendant knew or reasonably should have known he was working through authorized meal breaks.

For more information, or if you need legal assistance, please contact the Wagner Legal Group, P.C. at (310) 857-5293 or fill out our contact form on the website.