Gregory v. Keeton

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that 3 Garibay is distinguishable and defendant need not produce evidence when allegations in the complaint 4 support the maximum statutory penalty
• holding that 6 Garibay is distinguishable and defendant need not produce evidence when allegations in the complaint 7 support the maximum statutory penalty
• holding that an assumption of one violation per week was reasonable where 6 the plaintiff alleged that there was a “policy or practice” of meal and rest break violations and that 7 plaintiff “regularly” missed meal and rest breaks
• holding Garibay is distinguishable and a defendant need not produce evidence if 28 allegations in the complaint support the maximum statutory penalty
• finding it unreasonable to assume a 100% violation rate based on allegations that the defendants “maintained a policy or practice” of meal break violations
• assumption that each putative class member missed one meal break and one rest period per workweek was reasonable

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).