Skip to main content

Lawrence Hill, Adam Wise, And Robert Miller, Res. v. Garda Cl Northwest, Inc., App.

Wash. Ct. App.March 27, 2017No. 74617-1-ICited 9 times
Plaintiff WinGarda CL Northwest, Inc.$7,355,787.76 awarded
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Trickey, Schindler, Spearman
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
bench trial

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wage TheftFailure to Accommodate

Outcome

Nearly 500 employees won their class action wage and hour lawsuit against Garda CL Northwest for failing to provide legally sufficient meal periods and rest breaks under Washington law. The court awarded back pay, some double damages, prejudgment interest, and attorney fees, though the appellate court reversed the double damages for meal period violations and prejudgment interest on rest break damages.

What This Ruling Means

Security Company Must Pay Nearly $7.4 Million for Denying Workers Proper Breaks

Nearly 500 security guards sued their employer, Garda CL Northwest, for not providing proper meal periods and rest breaks required under Washington state law. The workers claimed the company either didn't give them breaks at all or didn't give them enough time to actually eat and rest during their shifts.

The court ruled in favor of the workers and ordered Garda to pay $7.36 million in total compensation. This included back pay for the missed breaks and attorney fees. While the original court also awarded double damages as punishment, a higher court later removed some of those extra penalties.

What This Means for Workers:

This case shows that employers must follow state laws about meal and rest breaks - they can't just ignore these requirements to save money or because of business demands. If your employer regularly denies you proper break time, you may have legal rights to compensation. Workers can band together in class action lawsuits when many employees face the same violations, which can be more effective than individual complaints. The large financial penalty here sends a message that courts take break violations seriously.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

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.