Drumm v. Morningstar, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that federal law regarding costs applies rather than “more generously interpreted” state law
• “[E]xpense 27 reimbursements are not ‘amounts for labor performed,’ and are not appropriately part 28 of the calculation.” (citations omitted)
• “The so-called ‘waiting time penalty’ is ‘equivalent to the 9 employee’s daily wages for each day he or she remained unpaid up to a total of 10 30 days.’” (quoting Mamika v. Barca, 68 Cal. App. 4th 487, 493 (1998))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Andrade v. Arby's Restaurant Group, Inc.
  N.D. California· 2016-12-13· cited 25×
• Carr v. Tadin, Inc.
  S.D. California· 2014-12-05· cited 15×
• Forouzan v. BMW of N. Am., LLC
  C.D. California· 2019-07-26· cited 5×

Cites

25 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

• Erie Railroad v. Tompkins
  Supreme Court· 1938-04-25· cited 18,491×
• Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
  Supreme Court· 1978-01-23· cited 3,039×
• Ketchum v. Moses
  California Supreme Court· 2001-02-26· cited 949×
• PLCM Group, Inc. v. Drexler
  California Supreme Court· 2000-06-02· cited 669×
• Serrano v. Priest
  California Supreme Court· 1977-10-04· cited 669×
• Chavez v. City of Los Angeles
  California Supreme Court· 2010-01-14· cited 460×
• Lakin v. Watkins Associated Industries
  California Supreme Court· 1993-12-16· cited 377×
• Serrano v. Unruh
  California Supreme Court· 1982-10-28· cited 293×
• Howard Turner Mary Turner Bill Oskowski Marisa Oskowski v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Company, a Delaware Corporation
  Ninth Circuit· 2003-08-11· cited 170×
• Champion Produce, Inc. v. Ruby Robinson Co.
  Ninth Circuit· 2003-09-08· cited 154×
• Marc Feldman v. Allstate Insurance Company Vicki Weed
  Ninth Circuit· 2003-03-05· cited 152×
• Mro Communications, Inc. v. American Telephone & Telegraph Company, Now At&t Corp.
  Ninth Circuit· 1999-12-13· cited 145×
• San Diego Police Officers' Ass'n v. San Diego City Employees' Retirement System
  Ninth Circuit· 2009-06-10· cited 138×
• Schachter v. Citigroup, Inc.
  California Supreme Court· 2009-11-02· cited 114×
• Weeks v. Baker & McKenzie
  California Court of Appeal· 1998-06-02· cited 107×
• Bond v. Pulsar Video Productions
  California Court of Appeal· 1996-11-07· cited 78×
• Sokolow v. County of San Mateo
  California Court of Appeal· 1989-08-17· cited 66×
• Earley v. Superior Court
  California Court of Appeal· 2000-04-26· cited 65×
• Evanow v. M/V Neptune
  Ninth Circuit· 1998-12-21· cited 49×
• K-2 Ski Co. v. Head Ski Co.
  Ninth Circuit· 1974-10-29· cited 46×