Taduran v. James R. Glidewell, Dental Ceramics (CA4/3 G064718, filed 5/26/26, pub. 6/17/26) Labor Code Violations | Attorney’s Fees Negative Multiplier – Employment Law Weekly

Taduran v. James R. Glidewell, Dental Ceramics (CA4/3 G064718, filed 5/26/26, pub. 6/17/26) Labor Code Violations | Attorney’s Fees Negative Multiplier

Abraham Taduran sued his former employer James R. Glidewell, Dental Ceramics, Inc. (Glidewell) for various Labor Code violations. The trial court awarded a total of $516,965 in civil penalties for four Labor Code violations, reducing the maximum penalty for several violations on a per employee basis. Taduran contends the trial court was required to reduce penalties for Labor Code violations on a per pay period basis. As discussed below, we conclude the Labor Code does not mandate any particular method for reducing a maximum civil penalty. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding a lesser amount of civil penalties here.

Taduran also sought $1,570,500 in attorney fees as the prevailing party, based on a lodestar of $1.047 million and a multiplier of 1.5. The trial court accepted the lodestar figure, but applied a modifier of 0.70, resulting in an award of $733,440 in attorney fees. Taduran contends the court’s reasoning for applying a negative multiplier cannot withstand “heightened scrutiny.” We disagree and find no abuse of discretion. As discussed below, the trial court considered the proper factors and reasonably applied a negative multiplier. Accordingly, we affirm.

https://www4.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/G064718.PDF

There are 0 comments

Share:

More Posts

Send Us A Message

Skip to content