Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gamez v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.

United States District Court, C.D. California, Western Division

April 20, 2016

JACQUELINE GAMEZ, an individual, Plaintiff,
v.
CHIPOTLE MEXICAN GRILL, INC., a Delaware corporation; CHIPOTLE SERVICES, LLC, a Colorado corporation; CHIPOTLE MEXICAN GRILL SERVICE, a business entity of unknown form; CHIPOTLE MEXICAN GRILL, a business entity of unknown form; CHIPOTLE, a business entity of unknown form; CHRISTINA COLE, an individual; and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, Defendants.

          ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REMAND [24]

          HON. STEPHEN V.WILSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         I. INTRODUCTION

         Plaintiff seeks to remand an employment disability discrimination, wrongful termination and labor code violation case to state court, arguing that the removal was not timely and the amount in controversy does not meet the $75, 000 minimum threshold required for a federal case.

         For the reasons stated below, this Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion to remand.

         II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

         Plaintiff alleges that she was employed by Defendants as a food preparer between 2004 and May 27, 2015. Dkt 23. In late April of 2014, Plaintiff claims to have sustained hand injuries while working, resulting in a disability. Dkt. 11-1, Ex. K at 7. Plaintiff's doctor instructed certain work restrictions for Plaintiff, including approximately six months of no lifting more than 10 pounds and a break every 50 minutes. Id. Plaintiff contends that a manager named Jorge Martinez refused to allow her to take 10 minute breaks for every 50 minutes of work. Id. When Plaintiff's doctor lifted the restrictions, Plaintiff had continued pain in her hands. Id. Plaintiff then requested to change positions, but claims that a manager Raquel Palaox ignored her request. Id.

         Around May 2015, Plaintiff alleges that manager Cole implemented a “no Spanish” policy in the Chipotle branch where Plaintiff was employed. Id. at 8. Plaintiff reported the policy to human resources because she believed it was in violation of the law. Id. As a result, Plaintiff contends that Cole reduced Plaintiff's hours from her normal 40 hours per week to 12 hours per week. Id. Plaintiff unsuccessfully protested the hour reduction. Id.

         Plaintiff further alleges that Cole intended to ostracize her by rejecting Plaintiff's offer to aid a new employee, and instead instructed a different employee to aid the new employee. Id. Plaintiff alleges that Cole instructed other employees to surveil Plaintiff to ensure compliance with the “no Spanish” policy, and that she reprimanded Plaintiff for saying “salud” instead of “bless you” to a coworker who sneezed. Id. Plaintiff also claims unfair criticism by Cole, and that Cole texted other managers not to contact Plaintiff for assistance nor provide her with work-related courtesies. Id. at 9.

         Plaintiff requested a transfer to another store. Id. Cole refused, saying she received complaints from other employees that Plaintiff did not work well with others. Id.

         Plaintiff claims Cole told Plaintiff there would be consequences if she complained to a manager outside the store, and Plaintiff could quit her job if she was unhappy. Id. at 10. Plaintiff was terminated from her employment on May 27, 2015. Id.

         III. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         On July 28, 2016, Plaintiff Jacqueline Gamez (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., Chipotle Services, LLC, Chipotle Mexican Grill Service, Chipotle Mexican Grill, Chipotle, and Christina Cole (“Cole”), in Los Angeles County Superior Court (collectively, “Defendants”). Dkt.1.

         In her complaint, Plaintiff advances eight claims under California law: (1) Discrimination in Violation of Gov't Code §§12940; (2) Harassment in Violation of Gov't Code §§12940; (3) Retaliation in Violation of Gov't Code §§12940; (4) Failure to Prevent Discrimination in Violation of Gov't Code §§12940; (5) Failure to Provide Reasonable Accommodation in Violation of Gov't Code §§12940; (6) Failure to Engage in Good Faith Interactive Process in Violation of Gov't Code §§12940; (7) Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy; and (8) Retaliation under Cal. Labor Code §§1102.5, 1102.6. Dkt.1.

         On September 16, 2016, Defendant Cole filed a Demurrer and Motion to Strike Portions of Plaintiff's Complaint. Dkt. 1. On October 7, 2016, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint, which dropped all of the claims asserted against Cole, with the exception of Plaintiff's cause of action for Harassment. Id. On November 10, 2016, Defendants filed a Demurer and Motion to Strike as to Plaintiff's First Amendment Complaint. Id. On December 16, 2016, the Court sustained the Demurrer on the ground that the First Amended Complaint was conclusory pled. Id. Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint on December 27, 2016. On January 12, 2017, Defendant Cole applied ex parte to dismiss the entire action against her. On January 12, 2017, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.