Kirby v. Immoos Fire Protection, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the attorneys’ fees shifting provisions in California Labor Code §§ 218.5 and 1194 do not apply to legal work relating to meal and rest period claims
• distinguishing between the “gravamen” of a California claim — which is a “violation” of an “obligation” — and its “remedy” — such as a monetary award
• reaffirming that “the remedy for a violation of the statutory obligation to provide IWC-mandated meal and rest periods is one additional hour of pay at the employee’s regular rate of compensation for each work day that the meal or rest period is not provided”
• cited with approval in Naranjo v. 17 Spectrum Sec. Servs., Inc., 13 Cal. 5th 93, 110–11 (2022)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).