Neama Rahmani (State Bar No.

223819)
efilings@westcoattriallawyers.com
Ronald L. Zambrano (State Bar No. 255613)
ron@westcoasttriallawyers.com
Ashley J. Garay (State Bar No. 31813)
ashleyg@westcoasttriallawyers.com
WEST COAST TRIAL LAWYERS, APLC
350 South Grand Avenue, Suite 3350
Los Angeles, California 90071
Telephone: (213) 927-3700
Facsimile: (213) 927-3701

Attorneys for Plaintiffs, CHARLIE

TORRES, and Other Aggrieved
Employees and On Behalf of the
General Public as Private Attorneys
General

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIOFRNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE

CHARLIE TORRES, an individual, et al., CASE NO.:

On Behalf of Themselves and All Others
Similarly Situated and On Behalf of the
General Public as Private Attorneys
General;
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR
Plaintiffs, DAMAGES, PENALTIES, ATTORNEYS
FEES, AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR,
INTER ALIA, LABOR CODE WAGE AND
HOUR VIOLATIONS
v.

WALT DISNEY PARKS AND

RESORTS US, INC., A Florida
Corporation; DISNEY WORLDWIDE
SERVICES INC., a Florida Corporation;
and DOES 1 through 250, DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

CLASS ACTIOCHARLIE TORRES COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

Defendants.

CLASS ACTIOCHARLIE TORRES COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

 Plaintiff CHARLIE TORRES and Other Aggrieved Employees, (hereinafter

“Plaintiffs”) on behalf of themselves and acting for the interests of other current and former

employees, allege as follows:

NATURE OF THE ACTION

1. This is an underpayment of wages class action pursuant to California Code of

Civil Procedure § 382, on behalf of Plaintiffs and all individuals working or having worked as

“Maintenance Engineers” ("Class Members") for Defendants WALT DISNEY PARKS AND

RESORTS US, INC. and DISNEY WORLDWIDE SERVICES INC, (hereinafter “DISNEY” or

“DEFENDANT EMPLOYER”) within the State of California.

2. Plaintiff is informed and believe and, based thereon allege, that the Class

Members consist of approximately 100 current and former Maintenance Engineer employees

and 16 Assistant Maintenance Engineer employees (hereinafter “Maintenance Engineer(s)”).

This class of employees were required by DISNEY to supply their own hand tools.

3. DISNEY failed to pay Plaintiff and other Class Members/Aggrieved Employees

the required double the minimum as prescribed by the Wage Orders for requiring they bring

their own hand tools.

4. Because of the underpayment of wages (i.e., less than the required double the

minimum wage) DISNEY failed to pay the correct regular rate, overtime rate or daily rate.

DISNEY also failed to accurately itemize in wage statements for failure to set the correct rate as

required by the Wage Orders.

5. Pursuant to company policy and/or practice and/or direction, for Plaintiff

TORRES and the proposed Class in paying less than the required double minimum wage,

DISNEY failed to: (1) provide final paychecks immediately upon involuntary termination or

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

1
within 72 hours of voluntary separation; (2) pay final wages at the location of employment;

and/or (3) include all wages due in the final paychecks.

6. Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and all Class Members, bring this action pursuant

to Labor Code §§ 201, 202, 203, 218.5, 218.6, 226, 226.7, 226.8, 510, 1194, 1197, 1198, 2082,

2998 et seq. California Code of Regulations, Title 8, § 11050 and Industrial Welfare

Commission Wage Order No. 4, for unpaid wages, penalties, injunctive and other equitable

relief, and reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

7. Pursuant to Article VI, § 10 of the California Constitution, subject matter

jurisdiction is proper in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, State of

California.

8. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants because Defendants

conduct business in California and because the events or transactions giving rise to this action

occurred within California.

9. Pursuant to § 395 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, venue as to each

Defendant is proper in the Superior Court of California for Orange County, because this is

where Plaintiff is employed as an Assistant Maintenance Engineer, and this is where the

wrongful misconduct alleged herein occurred. Defendants operate a theme park and hotel,

employ hourly employees, conduct business, and commit Labor Code violations in Orange

County, and each Defendant is within the jurisdiction of this Court for serve of process

purposes. The unlawful acts alleged herein have a direct effect on Plaintiff and those similarly

situated within the State of California and within Orange County. Defendants employ numerous

Class Members in Orange County.

PARTIES

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

2
 10. The named Plaintiff, CHARLIE TORRES, is a natural person and a citizen of

the State of California.

11. Defendant WALT DISNEY PARKS AND RESORTS US, INC, and DISNEY

WORLDWIDE SERVICES, INC. (hereinafter collectively referred to as “DISNEY” or

“DEFENDANT EMPLOYER”) is, and at all times herein mentioned, was a Florida corporation

that is engaged in the ownership and operation of hotels in Orange County with the capacity to

sue and to be sued, and doing business, with the same principal place of business located at

1150 Magic Way, Anaheim, California 92802.

12. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege, that each of the

Defendants herein were at all times the agent, employee, or representative of each remaining

Defendant and were at all times herein acting within the scope and purpose of said agency and

employment. Plaintiffs further allege that as to each Defendant, whether named or referred to as

a fictitious name, supervised, ratified, controlled, acquiesced in, adopted, directed, substantially

participated in, and/or approved the acts, errors, or omissions, of each remaining Defendant.

13. On information and belief, Plaintiff and all other members of the proposed Class

experienced Defendants’ common company policy of requiring Maintenance Engineers to

provide their own hand tools and equipment. On information and belief, Defendants willfully

failed to pay their employees and members of the Plaintiff Class required double-minimum

wage for supplying their own tools for essential job performance as prescribed by the Wage

Orders.

14. On information and belief, Plaintiff and all other members of the proposed Class

experienced Defendants’ common company policy of providing no rest periods and no meal

periods to employees working at least five hour shifts or second meal periods for shifts of at

least ten hours nor compensation in lieu thereof. On information and belief, Defendants willfully

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

3
failed to pay their employees and members of the Plaintiff Class in a timely manner rest and

meal period compensation due and owing to them upon termination of their employment with

Defendants.

15. On information and belief, Plaintiff and all other members of the proposed Class

experienced Defendants’ common company policy of failing to fully compensate Plaintiff Class

for hours worked in excess of 8 hours in a day, nor paid the correct overtime rate for applicable

overtime hours worked.

16. The true names and capacities of the Defendants named herein as DOES 1

through 250, inclusive, whether individual, corporate, partnership, association, or otherwise, are

unknown to Plaintiffs who therefore sue these Defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff

will request leave of court to amend this Complaint to allege their true names and capacities at

such time as they are ascertained.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

17. Defendant DISNEY owns and operates theme parks and hotels throughout

California, including Disneyland Hotel, and, at all times during the liability period, has

conducted business in Orange County and elsewhere within California. At this hotel, Defendant

has, among other things, employed persons as Assistant Maintenance Engineer.

18. On or around February 14, 2022, Plaintiff TORRES started working for

Defendant DISNEY as an Assistant Maintenance Engineer.

19. During the liability period, Plaintiff TORRES and the Proposed Class were

employed by Defendants as Maintenance Engineers or Assistance Maintenance Engineer

(hereinafter “Maintenance Engineer(s)”) and were paid on an hourly basis. Plaintiff and the

members of the Plaintiff Class were not provided rest or meal periods or compensation in lieu

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

4
thereof as mandated at the correct hourly rate of double the minimum wage pursuant to the

Wage Orders.

20. On information and belief, Defendants are and were well aware that Maintenance

Engineers were not provided rest and meal periods. Defendants' denial of wages and other

compensation due to Plaintiff and members of the Plaintiff Class in the position of Maintenance

Engineer was willful and deliberate.

21. Under California Wage Orders, employees required to bring their own tools must

be paid double the minimum wage.

22. DISNEY did not pay at least double the minimum wage to Plaintiff and the

Proposed Class who were entitle to same under the Wage Orders for being required to bring

their own hand tools.

23. Under California law, all employers must provide wage statement listing twelve

specific items as set forth in Labor Code § 226, including the accurate accounting of hours

worked.

24. Plaintiffs and Class Members were not paid the correct rate for all the overtime

hours they worked on those periods as the regular rate was not the required double-minimum

wage.

25. For those in the proposed class that were fired, DISNEY failed to provide unpaid

wages in their last paycheck, as they were under not calculated correctly from the inception.

26. To date, DISNEY has not paid Plaintiffs and Class Members all their wages due

and payable to them, in an amount to be proven at trial.

27. Plaintiff worked approximately 40 hours per week, sometimes more, sometimes

less.

28. Plaintiff clocked in and out to report his time worked.

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

5
 29. Plaintiff reported to a supervisor.

30. Plaintiff managed no people.

31. Plaintiff is still employed by Defendants.

CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS

32. This Plaintiffs brings this action on behalf of himself, and all others similarly

situated as a Class Action pursuant to § 382 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffs seek to

represent a class composed of and defined as follows:

All persons who are employed or have been employed by

Defendants in the State of California who, within four (4) years of
filing of this Complaint, have worked as Maintenance Engineers
that were expressly required to provide their own hand tools and
equipment necessary for the performance of their essential
functions but have not been paid the required hourly rate of
double minimum wage, have not been provided a rest period for
every four hours or major fraction thereof worked per day nor
were the Maintenance Engineers provided compensation of one
hour's pay or other compensation for each day on which such rest
periods were not provided.
33. Plaintiffs reserve the right under Rule 1855, subdivision (b), of the California

Rules of Court, to amend or modify the Class description with greater specificity or further

division into subclasses or limitation to particular issues.

34. This action has been brought and may properly be maintained as a Class Action

under Code of Civil Procedure § 382 because there is a well-defined community of interest in

the litigation and the proposed Class is easily ascertainable.

A. Numerosity

35. The potential members of the Class as defined are so numerous or many that

joinder of all the members of the Class is impracticable. While the precise number of Class

Members has not been determined at this time, Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that

basis allege, that DISNEY currently employs, and during the relevant time periods employed,

over 100 Maintenance Engineers and 16 Assistant Maintenance Engineers.

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

6
B. Commonality

36. There are questions of law and fact common to the Class that predominate over

any questions affecting only individual Class Members. These common questions of law and

fact include, without limitation and subject to possible further amendment:

(a) Whether Defendants' failure to double the minimum wage despite the

requirement that Maintenance Engineer employees provide their own

hand tools and equipment is illegal under Wage Order No. 4-2001 § 9(B);

(a) Whether Defendants' policy or practice of not paying the correct premium

for meal premiums for on-duty breaks is illegal under Labor Code §§

226.7 and Wage Orders No. 4-5;

(b) Whether Defendants' policy or practice of not paying Plaintiffs overtime

compensation, at the correct overtime rate, for the hours they worked over

40 in a workweek or eight hours in a day is illegal under Wage Order No.

4-5, and Labor Code §§ 510, 1194, and 1198;

(c) Whether Defendants violated Labor Code §§ 226 by not providing accurate pay

stubs for failure to state the correct hourly rate of double-minimum wage;

(d) Whether Defendants' policy or practice of not paying Maintenance

Engineer at least double the minimum wage is a violation of Wage Order

No. 4-5, and Labor Code §§ 1194 and 1197;

(e) Whether Defendants' policy or practice of not paying Maintenance

Engineer all their wages due in their final paychecks immediately upon

involuntary termination or when 72 hours notice was provided before

voluntary resignation, is unlawful under Wage Order No. 4-5, and Labor

Code §§ 201, 202 and/or 203;

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

7
 (f) The nature and extent of class-wide injury and the measure of damages,

restitution penalties, or other monetary relief owed.

C. Typicality

37. Plaintiffs' claims are typical of the claims of the Class. Plaintiffs and all

members of the Class sustained injuries and damages arising out of and caused by Defendants'

common course of conduct and policies in violation of laws, regulations that have the force and

effect of law and statutes as alleged herein. Plaintiffs' claims are thereby representative of and

co-extensive with the claims of the class. Plaintiffs' claims are typical of the claims of the

members of the Class because they were hourly-paid employees who, like the other members of

the Class, sustained damages and losses arising out of the Defendants’ unlawful conduct, which

includes, but is not limited to, the following: requiring employees to purchase and bring

essential tools and equipment necessary for performance without paying double the minimum

wage pursuant to the Wage Orders, repeatedly failing to pay – or indeed ever pay –for all earned

hours worked double the rate of the double-minimum wage requirement for requiring

employees to bring own tools; failure to provide accurate wage statements; failure to pay meal

break premiums, and failing to pay Plaintiffs and Class Members all wages due immediately

upon termination, and include all wages in said final paychecks.

D. Adequacy of Representation

38. Plaintiffs are members of the Class, do not have any conflicts of interest with

other Class Members, and will prosecute the case vigorously on behalf of the Class. Counsel

representing Plaintiffs are competent and experienced in litigating large employment class

actions, including wage and overtime class actions. Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately

represent and protect the interests of the Class Members.

E. Superiority of Class Action

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

8
 39. A class action is superior to other available means for the fair and efficient

adjudication of this controversy. Individual joinder of all Class Members is not practicable, and

questions of law and fact common to the Class predominate over any questions affecting only

individual members of the Class. Each Class Member has been damaged or suffered injury and

is entitled to recovery by reason of Defendants' illegal policies and/or practices including but not

limited to failing to pay – or indeed ever pay -- overtime compensation to its employees; failing

to pay double the minimum wage; failing to provide accurate wage statements; and failing to

pay Plaintiffs and Class Members all wages due immediately upon involuntary termination,

within 72 hours of voluntary resignation, paying said final wages at the place of employment,

and including all wages in said final paychecks. Class Action treatment will allow those

similarly situated persons to litigate their claims in the manner that is most efficient and

economical for the parties and the judicial system.

40. Class Action treatment will allow those similarly situated persons to litigate their

claims in the manner that is most efficient and economical for the parties and the judicial

system. Plaintiffs are unaware of any difficulties that are likely to be encountered in the

management of this action that would preclude maintenance as a Class Action.

41. Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of himself and on behalf of others similarly

situated current employees and former employees pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 382

and as Class Claims. The Class of employees that Plaintiffs seek to represent includes all

individuals employed as a “Maintenance Engineer”:

a. Who did not receive double-minimum wages; and/or

b. Who did not receive the correctly calculated rest breaks and/or

meal premiums; and/or

c. Who did not receive overtime compensation; and/or

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

9
 d. Who did not get accurate wage statements; and/or

e. Who were not timely paid all wages owed upon involuntary

termination, or within 72 hours of voluntary resignation, at the

place of employment; and/or

For the reasons alleged in this Complaint, this action should be certified as a

Class Action.

//

//

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

(Individual and Representative Claim

Failure to Pay Required Double Minimum Wages in Violation of

California Labor Code §§ 1182.12, 1194,

1194.2, 1197, and Wage Order No. 4-2001 § 9(B))

(Against DISNEY and Does 1-250)

42. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference the foregoing allegations as

though set forth herein.

43. Pursuant to Labor Code §§ 1182.12, 1194, 1194.2, and 1197, it is unlawful for a

California employer to suffer or permit an employee to work without paying wages for all hours

worked, as required by the applicable Industrial Welfare Commission (“IWC”) Wage Order.

44. Wage Order No. 4-2001 § 9(B) requires that “when tools or equipment are

required by the employer or are necessary to the performance of a job, such tools and equipment

shall be provided and maintained by the employer, except that an employee whose wages are at

least two (2) times the minimum wage provided herein may be required to provide and maintain

hand tools and equipment customarily required by the trade or craft.”

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

10
 45. During all times relevant, Class Members including Plaintiffs, have not been paid

double the minimum wages for all hours suffered or permitted to work in violation of the

minimum wage provisions of California Labor Code §§ §§ 1182.12, 1194, 1194.2, and 1197 and

IWC Wage Order Nos. 4 (9B), 5-1998, 5-2000, and 5-2001.

46. Defendants explicitly required Mechanical Engineers to personally pay for tools

and equipment for job performance. Defendants have intentionally failed and refused, and

continue to fail and refuse, to pay Class Members, including Plaintiff TORRES, double the

minimum wages for all earned work.

47. Therefore, at all times relevant, Defendants operated under and continue to

operate under a common policy and plan of willfully, regularly, and repeatedly failing and

refusing to pay double the minimum compensation at the rates required by the California Law.

48. Labor Code § 1194.2, subdivision (a) provides that, in an action to recover wages

because of the payment of a wage less than the double the minimum wage fixed by IWC Wage

Orders, an employee is entitled to recover liquidated damages in an amount equal to the wages

unlawfully unpaid and interest thereon.

49. Class Members, including Plaintiffs, should have received double the minimum

wages in a sum according to proof during all times relevant to this action.

50. Defendant DISNEY has knowingly and intentionally failed to comply with these

provisions on each and every wage statement that should have been provided to Plaintiff and

members of the proposed Class.

51. Plaintiff TORRES on behalf of himself and the Class request the recovery of the

unpaid break premiums, waiting time penalties, liquidated damages. interest, attorneys’ fees,

and costs in an amount to be determined at trial.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

11
 (Individual and Representative Claim for

Failure to Provide Rest Periods Or Compensation In-Lieu in Violation of California

Labor Code §§ 226.7; IWC Wage Order No. 4 and 5; Cal. Code Regs., Title 8 § 11050)

(Against DISNEY and Does 1-250)

52. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference the foregoing allegations as

though set forth herein.

53. By their failure to provide rest periods for every four hours or major fraction

thereof worked per day to non-exempt employees and failing to provide compensation for such

unprovided rest periods, as alleged above, Defendants willfully violated the provisions of Labor

Code section 226.7 and IWC Wage Order Nos. 5-1998, 5-2000, and 5-2001. Plaintiff and the

Class Members he seeks to represent did not willfully waive through mutual consent with

Defendants rest or meal periods.

54. As a result of the unlawful acts of DISNEY, Plaintiff and the Class he seeks to

represent have been deprived of premium wages in amounts to be determined at trial, and are

entitled to recovery of such amounts, plus interest and penalties thereon, attorneys' fees, and

costs, under Labor Code sections 226, 226.7, and IWC Wage Orders.

55. Sections 226 subdivision (a), and 1174 of the California Labor Code and IWC

Wage Order No. 5 require Defendants to itemize in wage statements and to accurately report

total hours worked by Plaintiff and the members of the proposed Class.

56. At all time relevant herein, IWC Wage Order No. 4 § 9 requires that “When tools

or equipment are required by the employer or are necessary to the performance of a job, such

tools and equipment shall be provided and maintained by the employer, except that an employee

whose wages are at least two (2) times the minimum wage provided herein may be required to

provide and maintain hand tools and equipment customarily required by the trade or craft.”

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

12
 57. Class Members, including Plaintiff TORRES, should have received double the

double the minimum wages in a sum according to proof during all times relevant to this action.

58. DISNEY has knowingly and intentionally violated provisions by persistently

paying Mechanical Engineers below double the minimum wage, and denying appropriate rates

for on-duty break premiums on every wage statement owed to the Plaintiff and members of the

proposed Class.

59. Plaintiff TORRES on behalf of himself and the Class request the recovery of the

unpaid break premiums, waiting time penalties, liquidated damages. interest, attorneys’ fees,

and costs in an amount to be determined at trial.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

(Individual and Representative Claim Failure to Pay Required Overtime

Wages in Violation of California Labor Code § 510, 1194 & 1198)

(Against DISNEY and Does 1-250)

60. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference the foregoing allegations as

though set forth herein.

61. California Labor Code § 510 provides that employees in California shall not be

employed more than eight hours in any workday or 40 hours in a workweek unless they receive

additional compensation beyond their regular wages in amounts specified by law.

62. California Labor Code §§ 1194 and 1198 provide that employees in California

shall not be employed more than eight hours in any workday unless they receive additional

compensation beyond their regular wages in amounts specified by law. Additionally, California

Labor Code § 1198 states that the employment of an employee for longer hours than those fixed

by the Industrial Welfare Commission is unlawful. The governing Wage Order of the Industrial

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

13
Welfare Commission requires, among other things, payment of a premium wage rate for all

hours worked in excess of 8 hours per day or 40 hours per week.

63. Still, DISNEY fails to compensate Plaintiff for all overtime hours worked in

excess of eight hours per day and/or 40 hours per week as required by the Labor Code §§ 510

and 1194. Specifically, Plaintiffs were either not paid for hours worked in excess of 8 hours in a

day, or Plaintiff and Class members were not paid the overtime rate for applicable overtime

hours worked.

64. At all times relevant, DISNEY has also operated under and continues to operate

under a common policy and plan of willfully, regularly, and repeatedly failing and refusing to

pay overtime compensation at the rates required by Labor Code § 510.

65. Plaintiff and the Class Members are informed and believe and based thereon

allege that during all times relevant to the Class Period, DISNEY failed to comply with Labor

Code § 510 and 1198 by virtue of DISNEY’s unlawful failure to pay additional, premium rate of

compensation to Plaintiff for his overtime hours worked, Plaintiff and Class members suffered

and will continue to suffer.

66. As a result of the unlawful acts of DISNEY, Plaintiff TORRES on behalf of

himself and the Class request the recovery of the unpaid break premiums, waiting time

penalties, liquidated damages. interest, attorneys’ fees, and costs in an amount to be determined

at trial.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Individual and Representative Claim for

Penalties for Violations of California Labor Code § 226 for

Failure to Provide Accurate Wage Statements)

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

14
 (Against DISNEY and Does 1-250)

67. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference the foregoing allegations as

though set forth herein.

68. Plaintiffs allege that Labor Code § 226 subdivision (a) requires, in pertinent part,

that “Every employer shall, semimonthly or at the time of each payment of wages, furnish each

of his or her employees, either as a detachable part of the check, draft, or voucher paying the

employee's wages, or separately when wages are paid by personal check or cash, an accurate

itemized statement in writing showing (1) gross wages earned, (2) total hours worked by the

employee, except for any employee whose compensation is solely based on a salary and who is

exempt from payment of overtime under subdivision (a) of § 515 or any applicable order of the

Industrial Welfare Commission, (3) the number of piece-rate units earned and any applicable

piece rate if the employee is paid on a piece-rate basis, (4) all deductions, provided that all

deductions made on written orders of the employee may be aggregated and shown as one item,

(5) net wages earned, (6) the inclusive dates of the period for which the employee is paid, (7)

the name of the employee and his or her social security number, except that by January 1, 2008,

only the last four digits of his or her social security number or an employee identification

number other than a social security number may be shown on the itemized statement, (8) the

name and address of the legal entity that is the employer, and (9) all applicable hourly rates in

effect during the pay period and the corresponding number of hours worked at each hourly rate

by the employee. . .” (Labor Code § 226 subdivision (a).)

69. Upon information and belief, during all times relevant to this action,

Maintenance Engineers, including Plaintiff, never received any wage statement with all required

information set forth under Labor Code § 226 from Defendants, and Plaintiffs suffered damages

from the lack of on-duty premiums and overtime compensation.

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

15
 70. Plaintiffs allege that, on numerous occasions, an exact amount by which will be

proven at trial, Defendants violated various provisions of § 226, including but not limited to

subdivisions (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(4), (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), (a)(8), and (a)(9) by failing to provide

Plaintiffs accurate itemized statement in writing showing (1) gross wages earned, (2) total hours

worked by the employee, (4) all deductions, (5) net wages earned, (6) the inclusive dates of the

period for which the employee is paid, (7) the name of the employee, (8) the name and address

of the legal entity that is the employer, and (9) all applicable hourly rates in effect during the pay

period and the corresponding number of hours worked at each hourly rate by the employee.

71. For DISNEY’s misconduct as alleged in this Complaint, Plaintiffs seek damages,

penalties, costs and attorneys’ fees pursuant to Labor Code § 226 subdivision (e) in an amount

to be proven at trial.

72. As a result of the unlawful acts of DISNEY, Plaintiff TORRES on behalf of

himself and the Class request Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief and attorneys’ fees and costs

pursuant to § 226 subdivision (g) in an amount to be proven at trial.

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Individual and Representative Claim for

Failure to Pay Timely Earned Wages During Employment and

Upon Separation of Employment in Violation of

California Labor Code §§ 201, 202, 203, 204, 218.5, and 218.6)

(Against DISNEY and Does 1-250)

73. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference the foregoing allegations as

though set forth herein.

74. Pursuant to Labor Code § 201, “If an employer discharges an employee, the

wages earned and unpaid at the time of discharge are due and payable immediately.”

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

16
 75. Pursuant to Labor Code § 202, “If an employee not having a written contract for

a definite period quits his or her employment, his or her wages shall become due and payable

not later than 72 hours thereafter, unless the employee has given 72 hours previous notice of his

or her intention to quit, in which case the employee is entitled to his or her wages at the time of

quitting.”

76. Labor Code § 203 provides, in pertinent part: “If an employer willfully fails to

pay, without abatement or reduction, ... any wages of an employee who is discharged or who

quits, the wages of the employee shall continue as a penalty from the due date thereof at the

same rate until paid or until an action therefore is commenced; but the wages shall not continue

for more than 30 days. ..."

77. Pursuant to Labor Code § 204, “all wages … earned by any person in any

employment are due and payable twice during each calendar month, on days designated in

advance by the employer as the regular paydays.”

78. Pursuant to Labor Code §§ 218.5 and 218.6, an action may be brought for the

nonpayment of wages and fringe benefits.

79. Plaintiffs and Class Members were not properly paid pursuant to the

requirements of Labor Code §§ 201, 202, and 204 and thereby seek the unpaid wages. To date,

for example, DISNEY has not paid Plaintiffs all earned wages.

80. Plaintiffs and Class Members are informed and believe and based thereon allege

that Defendants willfully failed to pay Plaintiffs’ wages pursuant to the requirements of Labor

Code §§ 201, 202, and 204, after Plaintiffs’ demand, and therefore Plaintiffs are entitled the

associated unpaid wages and waiting time penalties. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and

based thereon allege that Defendants did this with the intent to secure for himself a discount on

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

17
their indebtedness and/or with intent to annoy harass, oppress, hinder, delay and/or defraud

Plaintiffs.

81. Plaintiff and Class Members have been deprived of their rightfully earned wages

as a direct and proximate result of DISNEY’s failure and refusal to pay legally sufficient

compensation and for the reasons alleged in this Complaint.

82. As a result of the unlawful acts of DISNEY, Plaintiff TORRES and the Class

Members request the unpaid wages, waiting time penalties, interest, attorneys’ fees, costs,

damages, and other remedies in an amount to be proven at trial.

//

//

//

//

//

//

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Individual and Representative Claim Under the California

Unfair Business Practices Act, California

Business and Professions Code §§ 17200, et seq.)

(Against DISNEY and Does 1-250)

83. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference the foregoing allegations as

though set forth herein.

84. Defendants, and each of them, are “persons” as defined under Business and

Professions Code § 17021.

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

18
 85. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and based thereon allege that Defendants

committed the unfair business practices, as defined by Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200, et seq.,

by violating the laws alleged to have been violated in this Complaint and which allegations are

incorporated herein by reference and include, but are not limited to:

a. DISNEY’s policy or practice of not paying Plaintiffs double the minimum

wages and overtime compensation violated Labor Code §§ 2699 et. seq.
and Wage Order No. 4-2001 § 9(B);
b. DISNEY violated Labor Code §§226.7 and Wage Order No. 4-5 for not
paying Plaintiffs meal premiums for on-duty breaks accurately;
c. DISNEY violated Labor Code §§ 510, 1194, and 1198 by not providing
accurate wage statements reflecting all overtime earned and on-duty
break premiums;
d. DISNEY violated Labor Code §§ 226 by not paying Plaintiffs overtime
wages owed;
e. DISNEY violated Labor Code §§ Labor Code §§ 201, 202 and/or 203 by
not timely paying hourly employees all of their wages due in their final
paychecks immediately upon termination.
86. The practices described above were unfair within the meaning of Cal. Bus. &

Prof. Code § 17200, et seq., because the acts were intentionally performed to harm Plaintiffs.

87. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that the unlawful,

unfair and fraudulent business practices described above present a continuing threat to members

of the public because it is believed that DISNEY continue to operate in the illegal manner as

alleged above.

88. Further, such skirting of the California labor laws presents a threat to the general

public in that the enforcement of the labor laws is essential to ensure that all California

employers compete equally, and that no California employer receives an unfair competitive

advantage at the expense of its employees.

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

19
 89. As a result of the above-alleged misconduct, Plaintiffs, on behalf of himself and

similarly aggrieved employees, have been deprived of lawful wages to which he/she or they

were entitled and Plaintiffs and these similarly aggrieved employees have suffered damages, in

an amount to be determined according to proof at trial.

90. The unfair, fraudulent, and unlawful business practices of DISNEY are likely to

continue because DISNEY appear to have a pattern and practice of committing the same type of

misconduct as alleged herein; therefore, the imposition of a preliminary injunction is justified.

91. As a direct and proximate result of the above-alleged misconduct, Plaintiffs are

entitled to and hereby seeks injunctive relief and restitution for, among other things, back pay,

and other lost benefits in an amount to be proven at trial for the last four years from the date this

Complaint was filed.

92. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid acts and conduct of DISNEY,

Plaintiffs are entitled to and hereby seeks attorneys’ fees as permitted by law and as provided for

by §1021.5 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.

SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Individual and Representative Claim Under the Private Attorney General Act,

California Labor Code §§ 2698, et seq.)

(Against DISNEY and Does 1-250)

93. Plaintiffs incorporate all paragraphs above as though fully set forth herein.

94. California Labor Code §§ 2698, et seq. (“PAGA”) permits Plaintiffs to recover

civil penalties for the violation(s) of the Labor Code.

95. At all times herein set forth, PAGA was applicable to Plaintiffs' employment by

Defendants.

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

20
 96. At all times herein set forth, PAGA provides that any provision of law under the

California Labor Code that provides for a civil penalty to be assessed and collected by the

LWDA for violations of the California Labor Code may, as an alternative, be recovered through

a civil action brought by an aggrieved employee on behalf of himself and other current or

former employees pursuant to procedures in California Labor Code section 2699.3.

97. Pursuant to PAGA, a civil action under PAGA may be brought by an “aggrieved

employee,” who is any person that was employed by the alleged violator and against whom one

or more of the alleged violations was committed.

98. Plaintiffs were jointly employed by Defendants and the alleged violations were

committed against them during their time of employment and they are, therefore, an Aggrieved

Employee. Plaintiffs and other employees are Aggrieved Employees as defined by California

Labor Code section 2699(c) in that they are all current or former employees of Defendants who

are or were employed as non-exempt employees, and one or more of the alleged violations were

committed against them.

99. Pursuant to California Labor Code sections 2699.3 and 2699.5, an aggrieved

employee, including Plaintiffs, may pursue a civil action arising under PAGA after the following

requirements have been met: The aggrieved employees shall give written notice by certified

mail (hereinafter “Employee’s Notice”) to the LWDA and the employer of the specific

provisions of the California Labor Code alleged to have been violated, including the facts and

theories to support the alleged violations. The LWDA shall provide notice (hereinafter “LWDA

Notice”) to the employer and the aggrieved employee by certified mail that it does not intend to

investigate the alleged violation within thirty (30) calendar days of the postmark date of the

Employee’s Notice. Upon receipt of the LWDA Notice, or if the LWDA Notice is not provided

within thirty-three (33) calendar days of the postmark date of the Employee’s Notice, the

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

21
aggrieved employee may commence a civil action pursuant to California Labor Code section

2699 to recover civil penalties in addition to any other penalties to which the employee may be

entitled.

100. On or about January 12, 2024, Plaintiff provided written notice to the LWDA via

its online claim submission portal and notified Defendants of the specific provisions of the

California Labor Code alleged to have been violated, including the facts and theories to support

the alleged violations.

101. Plaintiffs will have satisfied the administrative prerequisites under California

Labor Code section 2699.3(a) to recover civil penalties against Defendants, in addition to other

remedies, for violations of California Labor Code sections 201, 202, 203, 204, 226(a), 510,

1194, 1197, 1198 and 1770-1773 et seq.

102. Pursuant to California Labor Code §§ 2699(a), 2699.3 and 2699.5, Plaintiffs and

all other Aggrieved Employees are entitled to recover civil penalties against Defendants, in

addition to other remedies, for violations of California Labor Code sections 201, 202, 203, 204,

226(a), 510, 1194, 1197, 1198 and 1770-1773 et seq.

103. As a result of the unlawful acts of Defendants, Plaintiff TORRES and the Class

Members are entitled to seek and recover reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to

California Labor Code § 2699 and any other applicable statute.

PRAYER

1. For damages according to proof, including loss of earnings, deferred

compensation, and other employment benefits, and interest thereon;

2. For interest provided by law including, but not limited to, Civil Code § 3291;

3. For general unpaid wages at overtime wage rates and such general and special

damages as may be appropriate;

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

22
 4. For statutory penalties pursuant to California Labor Code §226(e);

5. For statutory wage penalties pursuant to California Labor Code §§ 1770-1773;

6. For restitution of unpaid wages to Plaintiff and prejudgment interest from the day

such amounts were due and payable;

7. For reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of suit incurred herein pursuant to

California Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5;

8. For injunctive relief pursuant to California Business & Professions Code

§ 17200, et seq.;

10. For costs incurred by Plaintiff, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of

suit, in obtaining the benefits due to Plaintiffs and for violations of Plaintiffs’ civil rights as set

forth above; and pursuant to the Labor Code §§ 218.5, 218.6, 226(e), 1194(a), 2699; and

California Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5; and

11. For such other and further relief as the court deems just and proper.

//

//

Dated: March 5, 2024

WEST COAST TRIAL LAWYERS, APLC

By:
Ronald L. Zambrano
Ashley J. Garay
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

23
 Plaintiffs hereby respectfully demand a jury trial.

Dated: March 5, 2024

WEST COAST TRIAL LAWYERS, APLC

By:
Ronald L. Zambrano
Ashley J. Garay
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DAMAGES AGAINST DISNEY

24