SAN DIEGO – A former Starbucks employee claims she was denied proper meal periods and has filed a class action.
Kileigh Carrington filed a complaint on behalf of individually and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated on Dec. 21 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against Starbucks Corp. and Does 1-10 alleging violation of state labor codes.
According to the complaint, the plaintiffs allege that she was employed by the defendants and continuously worked beyond five hours without being provided any meal and rest periods or an additional hour of pay as meal period penalty. As a result, the plaintiff alleges she suffered injury, loss and harm.
The plaintiffs hold Starbucks Corp. and Does 1-10 responsible because the defendants allegedly denied proper meal periods or meal period penalties and denied wages earned and the right to collect unemployment insurance benefits.
The plaintiffs request a trial by jury and seek enjoin defendants from pursuing their fraudulent policies, acts and practices; maintain “opt-out” class action; compensatory and statutory damages; penalties and restitution; attorney’s fees and costs; interest and further relief as the court deems just. She is represented by William B. Sullivan, Erick K. Yaeckel and Clint S. Engleson of Sullivan Law Group in San Diego.
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California Case number 3:16-cv-03074