Gamboa v. George's Chicken Tempe LLC
Case Details
- Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
- Labor: Fair Standards
- Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
- Unknown
- Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
- default judgment
- State
- Arizona
- Circuit
- Ninth Circuit
Related Laws
No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Claim Types
Outcome
Plaintiff obtained default judgment for $2,700 in wage violation damages under the FLSA and Arizona wage laws, and the court awarded an additional $12,143.89 in attorneys' fees and costs.
What This Ruling Means
Gamboa v. George's Chicken Tempe LLC
What Happened
An employee named Gamboa worked at George's Chicken Tempe LLC and claimed the restaurant failed to pay wages owed. The employer did not respond to the lawsuit in court.
What the Court Decided
Because the employer didn't defend itself, the court sided with Gamboa automatically. The judge ordered George's Chicken to pay $2,700 in unpaid wages under federal and Arizona wage laws. Additionally, the court required the employer to pay $12,143.89 to cover Gamboa's attorney fees and court costs. The total judgment was $14,843.89.
Why This Matters for Workers
This case shows that workers can win wage theft lawsuits and recover not just missing pay, but also the costs of taking legal action. The large attorney fee award signals that courts will hold employers financially accountable for forcing workers to hire lawyers to recover earned wages. If you believe your employer owes you unpaid wages, you may have a legal right to recover those amounts plus attorney fees.
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Similar Rulings
Browse Related
Facing something similar at work?
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 3 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.