Skip to main content

Ulloa II v. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc.

N.D. Cal.August 28, 2023No. 4:23-cv-01752
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
Labor: Other
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Unknown
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
motion to dismiss

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wage TheftFailure to Accommodate

Outcome

Court converted defendant's untimely Rule 12(b)(6) motion into a Rule 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings, granting it in part and denying it in part. Some wage-and-hour claims survived the motion while others were dismissed.

What This Ruling Means

**Ulloa II v. Securitas Security Services USA: Mixed Results in Wage Dispute** This case involved a dispute between workers and Securitas Security Services USA, a major security company, over wage and hour practices and labor law violations. The workers claimed the company violated laws regarding how employees should be paid for their work time and working conditions. In August 2023, a federal court in California issued a mixed decision on the workers' claims. This means the court sided with the workers on some issues but ruled in favor of the company on others. The specific details of which claims succeeded or failed weren't fully detailed in the available information, and no monetary damages were reported at this stage. **What this means for workers:** This case highlights the ongoing challenges employees face when trying to hold employers accountable for wage and hour violations. Mixed court decisions are common in employment law cases, showing that workers can win some battles even if they don't win everything they're seeking. For security industry workers specifically, this case demonstrates that courts will examine employer practices around pay and working conditions, though success isn't guaranteed on all claims.

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

Similar Rulings

Desrosiers
S.D.N.Y.Jul 2021
Settlement
Nita Posey, Relator v. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development
Minn. Ct. App.May 2016
Plaintiff Win
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. St. Francis Xavier Parochial School and St. Francis Xavier Church
D.C. CircuitJul 1997
Remanded
People in re S.L. and A.L
COLOCTAPPDec 2017

The Rio Blanco County Department of Human Services (Department) became involved with the parents in this case as a result of concerns about the children's welfare due to the condition of the family home, the parents' use of methamphetamine, and criminal cases involving the parents. Attempts at voluntary services failed, and on the Department's petition for dependency and neglect, the district court ultimately terminated the parents' rights. On appeal, the parents contended that the Department failed to make reasonable efforts to reunify them with their children. Specifically, the parents contended that the Department did not give them sufficient time to complete the services under their treatment plans and failed to accommodate their drug testing needs. The termination hearing was not held until more than a year after the motion to terminate was filed. For nine months before the motion to terminate was filed, the Department provided numerous services to the parents, including substance abuse therapy, therapeutic visitation supervision, drug abuse monitoring, and a parental capacity evaluation. The Department also provided counseling for the children. Both parents missed drug tests and tested positive during the testing period, and both were arrested for possession of methamphetamine during the pendency of the case. The Department made reasonable accommodations to meet the parents' needs and the parents had sufficient time to comply with their treatment plans. The record supports the trial court's findings that termination was appropriate because (1) the court-approved appropriate treatment plan had not been complied with by the parents or had not been successful in rehabilitating them (2) the parents were unfit and (3) the conduct or condition of the parents was unlikely to change within a reasonable time. Father also contended that the trial court's decision to interview the 9-year-old twin children together in chambers fundamentally and seriously affected the basi

Defendant Win
Shelley Savage v. Glendale Union High School, District No. 205, Maricopa County
9th CircuitSep 2003
Plaintiff Win

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 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.