California Court of Appeal

In a dispute involving tip sharing brought under the Unfair Competition Law, trial court judgment holding that Starbucks's tip allocation policy violated California law is reversed where: 1) Labor Code sec. 351 does not prohibit Starbucks from permitting shift supervisors to equitably share in the proceeds placed in collective tip boxes; and 2) such a result would be contrary to legislative objectives.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/02/2009
• Published 06/02/2009

Judges

• HALLER, Acting P.J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld and Rex S. Heinke, Catherine A. Conway, Gregory W. Knopp, Jessica M. Weisel, Johanna R. Shargel, Los Angeles, and Daniel L. Nash for Defendant and Appellant., Bohm, Matsen, Kegel & Aguilera and A. Eric Aguilera;  Law Office of Terry J. Chapko, Coronado, and Terry J. Chapko;  Goldstein, Demchak, Baller, Borgen & Dardarian, David Borgen and Laura L. Ho, Oakland;  Rudy, Exelrod & Zieff, Steven G. Zieff, David A. Lowe and Kenneth J. Sugarman, San Francisco, for Plaintiffs and Respondents.