In the Matter of the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: H.O. (Minor Child) and T.O. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)

**Court Rules on When Business Owners Are Personally Responsible for Unpaid Wages** This case involved a worker who sued both White Communications, LLC and its owner, Shirley White, claiming the company failed to pay proper wages and wrongfully terminated them. The worker wanted to hold the owner personally responsible for the unpaid wages, not just the company. The court ruled in favor of Shirley White, deciding she could not be held personally liable for the wage violations. The court found that White did not have enough personal involvement in the day-to-day wage and hour decisions, nor did she participate sufficiently in company operations to be considered responsible for causing the violations. Under California law, business owners can only be held personally accountable for wage theft if they directly participated in or caused the violations. **What this means for workers:** If your employer doesn't pay you properly, you may not always be able to go after the business owner's personal assets. To hold an owner personally responsible for unpaid wages, you need to show they were directly involved in the decisions that led to the wage violations. This makes it harder to collect money from business owners when their companies can't pay what they owe workers.