Leatherbury v. C&H Sugar Company, Inc. et al

Filing 66


Download PDF
1 2 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 No. C 10-1969 SI GLENN LEATHERBURY, 7 ORDER DIRECTING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff, 8 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 v. C&H SUGAR COMPANY, INC., AMERICAN SUGAR REFINING INC., and DOES 1-100, 11 Defendant. 12 / 13 On November 8, 2012, the Court heard oral argument on defendants’ motion for summary 14 judgment. Defendants moved for summary judgment on plaintiff’s ninth cause of action for failure to 15 pay overtime, because they contend that Leatherbury was properly categorized as an exempt employee 16 as the manager of union employees. As to this classification claim, the parties have not fully briefed 17 the legal standard, the proper categorization of Leatherbury’s various tasks, and in particular whether 18 Leatherbury recommended that any employee be hired or fired, or whether those recommendations were 19 given particular weight. 20 The Court hereby ORDERS both parties to submit supplemental briefing on the issue of 21 Leatherbury’s classification as an exempt employee, to be submitted to the Court by November 19, 22 2012. The remainder of the summary judgment motion will remain under submission until receipt of 23 that briefing. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 26 Dated: November 8, 2012 27 SUSAN ILLSTON United States District Judge

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?