Parents are expected to pay for the child according their ability. A parent with a higher standard of living is obligated to make sure his child can share in the lifestyle. However, the non custodial parent cannot be expected to pay for a lifestyle which is beyond his own.

Child support provides for all of the child's "needs" during formative years. The courts consider a parent's first obligation in life to support their minor children, and the child is to share in the standard of living of both parents. Therefore, child support provides for not just needs, but a lifestyle as well.

The household of the custodial parent may benefit from the child support if the noncustodial parent's income far exceeds the custodian's. In addition, a percentage of future bonuses to the non-custodial parent may be awarded to the children to ensure the standard of living is shared.

Federal law requires that guidelines be used to set the amount of child support payment. The guidelines are to set an objective measure, so that courts do not vary in their mandates. The formula is based on the net incomes of the parents. Then mandatory expenses such as Social Security, income tax, Medicare, and any other mandatory fees are subtracted. The net income is then used to determine child support.

Evidence of income can be obtained through pay statements or tax statements. All income is to be shown by law. If a party is suspected of not documenting certain income such as cash, an attorney is needed to work on the case.

In addition to income, formulas also consider other factors such as time spent with the child. The parent who spends the greatest time with the child is incurring the greatest expenses when raising the child. In addition the number of children a parent has is considered. Because there are fixed expenses that do not rise with the addition of other children, the amount does not double for second child. Lastly, special circumstances will be factored into the equation. Such items as high medical expenses, special educational needs, uninsured catastrophic losses, travel expenses for visitation purposes, and the cost of living expenses for other children have an effect on the amount of child support.

There are now computer programs which have been designed to objectively calculate support. However, there are still many factors to be considered.

By: Joseph Devine
If you are in need of legal assistance, visit http://www.divorcelawyerssandiego.com

In most unlawful arrest or imprisonment cases, private security is involved. While the law in California allows for any private person to make a "citizen's arrest", there are restrictions and limited authority to do so. Compared to a police officer, a security officer has far less authority in detaining individuals. When a person has been detained or arrested unlawfully, that person becomes a victim and has a right to be compensated for any physical harm or emotional upset that results.

To protect their property and maintain business peace, most retailers and large property owners hire guard and agents. These are generally uniformed guards from a security service patrolling the location. Their primary function is to ensure certain rules are obeyed (relative to parking and other activities), and they rarely have the chance to capture suspected law violators. When guards detain or arrest a person, they are taking a chance of violating that individual's right to be free of unlawful imprisonment. For instance, if someone is detained by a guard for breaking into a car, which happens to be that individuals own car, that person has the right for compensation for any unlawful use of force in the arrest. In the worst case scenario, a guard can use his weapon and hurt someone that he wrongly believes committed a crime. For this situation, there may be some liability issues for substantial damages and injuries, and the employer and guard may be legally responsible.

Agents in retail security and loss prevention probably come into contact with more suspected law violators than others in the field of private law enforcement. It is not unusual for an "undercover" shoplift agent to catch an alleged shoplifter and follow through with criminal prosecution. If the agent is not reasonably sure that the shoplifter really stole something from a shop, compensation may be given to the victim for emotional and physical harm that he suffered. It is possible for the agent to be immune from liability if there is "probable cause" to believe the suspect did in fact take or attempted to take store merchandise unlawfully. This is called "merchant's privilege" and, although not absolute, it can be called into play to protect a retailer in the even of a lawsuit.

Not only may the retailers and property owners be held responsible for false arrest and imprisonment, they may also be held liable for malicious prosecution of a criminal case if the accused is found not guilty in the end. Sometimes, an inexperienced or overzealous guard or agent will unlawfully apprehend or arrest an individual and then add to the trouble by insisting on a criminal prosecution. If the case goes to court resulting in an acquittal, the falsely accused person has a right to be compensated for the initial detention and arrest, as well as the criminal prosecution. They will not impose liability on the guard or agent until it can be proven that said guard was not acting with probable cause. Because most private law enforcement employees do not have the same training or education as police officers, it is common for these errors to occur.

There is an endless amount of harm that can be caused if someone is falsely arrested or imprisoned. A trial lawyer with experience will assist you in sorting through the truths and the legal system to achieve a fair outcome.

By: Paul W Ralph
As an Orange County Personal Injury Attorneys, Paul W. Ralph has seen his fair share of false imprisonment cases. From wrongful arrest to improper detainment, Mr. Ralph knows that sometimes mistakes are made and the arresting party needs to be held responsible. That's why, as an Orange County false arrest lawyer, he works hard to see the victims compensated.

In recent weeks, the subject of employee tipping has received considerable attention in the media. There have been lawsuits in California, Massachusetts, and other states which should serve to remind employers about the importance of knowing and then following State and Federal laws on tipping.

In California, there are three critical rules which must be followed by employers:

1. No manager may take any portion of a tip left for an employee;
2. An employer may not offset any credit card processing fee against a tip left by a customer for an employee; and
3. Absolutely no portion of any tip received by any employee may be offset against the minimum wage of $8.00 per hour paid to an employee.

It is worth noting, however, that in California, a service charge by the business owner is not considered a tip for purposes of the California Labor Code provisions dealing with tipping.

There is still some controversy in California concerning the subject of tip pooling. Tip pooling is not automatically illegal in California. The controversy arises over what type of tip pooling arrangement is allowed.

The California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement has traditionally took the strict view that in order for an employee to participate in the tip pool, he or she must render direct table service. Such a rule is both artificial and unworkable.

Take for example, the customer who orders a drink from his table. Should it make a difference in any tip pooling arrangement whether the bartender brings the drink to the table or whether the server delivers the drink?

Another example - in those restaurants where the cooking of the food is in plain view of the customers, should the cooks be prohibited from having even a small percentage of the tip?

Finally, if the dishes on which the food is served are not clean, then the customer will not enjoy the dining experience. Thus, should the dishwasher receive a tiny percentage from the tip pool?

In recent years, the Courts, especially the Federal Courts have rejected the artificial "direct table service" distinction. Rather these decisions leave it to the restaurateur to adopt a tip pooling plan. So long as that tip pooling plan is reasonable, it is likely to be upheld by the Courts. Obviously, the server should get the lion's share of any tip, with smaller percentages going to those who participate in the dining experience.

Given the attention that tipping and tip pooling has received in recent weeks, this is a good time for all employers to review their tipping and tip pooling practices to ensure that such practices are consistent with both State and Federal law.

By: Russell Thomas
Attorney at Law
THOMAS & ASSOCIATES
4121 Westerly Place, Suite 101
Newport Beach, California 92660
Tel: (949) 752-0101
Fax: (949) 257-4756
Email: rthomas@rjtlawfirm.com
Web: http://www.rjtlawfirm.com

J.D., Harvard Law School, 1967

Specializes in Employment Law and Litigation;Offices in Southern California (Los Angeles and Orange County)

Sometimes, one of the key pieces of evidence in your case is a hearsay statement. Maybe it's an admission from the defendant or from the defendant's agent. It might be testimony from another trial or hearing that squarely addresses an issue in your case. Whatever the situation, if you need to offer an out-of-court statement into evidence for the truth of the matter asserted in the statement itself, you have a problem on your hands.

But like getting a flat tire in the rain, it might not be in insurmountable problem. It is, however, a problem nonetheless, which means you need to plan your solution early enough to implement it. So when planning your case in chief, consider whether you might benefit from the spontaneous-statements hearsay exception. Let me give you an example.

The first case I ever tried to a jury was actually decided on a spontaneous statement of an unavailable hearsay declarant. I won that trial because I recognized my hearsay problem early enough to successfully implement my solution.

I was prosecuting a misdemeanor domestic-violence case. The defendant was a six foot five inch tall, 275 pound bruiser. The victim was his five foot tall, 90 pound wife. They were camping at the San Elijo Beach campground, and he cold-cocked her with a closed fist right cross straight to her eye socket, producing a conspicuous shiner.

The next morning, a park ranger came up to the couple. When he noticed the wife's shiner, he asked her: "What happened?" Suddenly, she became visibly upset as though she were re-living the prior night's events. Tears welled up in her eyes. Then, she pointed to her husband and dramatically blurted out: "He hit me!"

One of the social realities of trying domestic-violence cases is that the victims find themselves in a vicious conflict of interests. On the one hand, they want their abusers to be incarcerated so that they are free from the physical abuse. But on the other hand, they may be financially dependent on their abusers, and incarceration would therefore be extremely inconvenient for the household. They also fear retaliation. This leads to a phenomenon commonly known as "the recanting witness" or "the recalcitrant" or "absentee victim."

Naturally, by the time the trial came around, the wife was "unavailable." She ducked my subpoenas, slipped into the network of battered women and homeless shelters, and was gone. That meant that my star witness would be the park ranger who had to testify about what she said, which was plainly hearsay.

Enter the spontaneous statement - also known as the exited utterance.

Evidence Code §1240 states that a statement is not inadmissible hearsay if it "purports to narrate, describe, or explain an act, condition, or event perceived" and was made "spontaneously while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by such perception."

Case law states that for the exception to apply, there must be (1) an occurrence sufficiently startling to produce "nervous excitement and render the utterance spontaneous and unreflecting;" (2) the utterance must have been made before there was time to "contrive and misrepresent," i.e., while the nervous excitement still dominated the reflective powers; and (3) "the utterance must relate to the circumstances of the occurrence causing it." People v. Poggi (1988) 45 Cal.3d 306, 318. The idea is that statements made in the heat of the moment are less likely to be false.

The admissibility of spontaneous statements is a matter within the discretion of the trial court. People v. Pearch (1991) 229 Cal.App. 3d 1282, 1290. Often, the main issue - as it was in my domestic-violence case - is a lapse in time between the event and the statement. But the key is that the statement must be made under the stress and excitement of the event "while the reflective powers were still in abeyance." People v. Washington (1969) 71 Cal.2d 1170, 1176.

For example, the statements in Washington were made an hour after the event, but were nevertheless admissible. See also, People v. Raley (1992) 2 Cal.4th 870, 893 (18-hour gap in time); and In re Emilye A. (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 1695, 1713 (2-day gap in time). However in one case, the court found that 13 hours between the startling event and the statement was too long for the exception to apply. Pearch, supra, 229 Cal.App.3d at 1290.

There is no bright-line rule about the timing of the event and the utterance. The distinction seems to be whether the declarant was still under the stress of the event. In my domestic-violence case, for example, the court was persuaded that the victim was under the stress of the battery because she welled up and seemed to be re-living the attack when she identified her husband as the attacker. He was also standing right behind her when the park ranger asked her "what happened?"

The spontaneous-utterance exception is not limited to verbal testimony. Affidavits or declarations can also contain hearsay made admissible by the exception. Mecchi v. Picchi (1966) 245 Cal.Ap.2d 470.

If you plan to introduce a spontaneous utterance at trial, be sure to have all necessary witnesses to lay your foundation. For example, be sure to call the person who heard the statement. Also, be sure to call the person who can testify as to the declarant's state of mind, i.e., that the declarant was excited and under the stress of the event.

Finally, be sure to consider all other possible exceptions such as contemporaneous statements (Evid. Code §1241); statements relating to the infliction or threat of physical injury (Evid. Code §1370); statements by an elder or dependent-adult victim of abuse (Evid. Code §1380); admissions (Evid. Code §1220); dying declarations (Evid. Code §1242); statements of state of mind, emotion or physical sensation (Evid. Code §1250); declaration against interest (Evid. Code §1230); or prior inconsistent statements (Evid. Code §1235).

If you know that your case depends on a spontaneous statement - or any hearsay exception for that matter - plan early. Try to obtain your opponent's stipulation as to admissibility, or else subpoena all foundational witnesses, request an Evidence Code §402 hearing and/or file motions in limine as necessary. Whatever the case, be proactive in getting your evidence admitted, especially if you can foresee an objection.

By: Gordon L Levinson
Gordon Levinson has successfully represented hundreds of cases in California. A graduate of University of San Francisco School of Law, Gordon now uses his insurance-defense experience representing injured plaintiffs.

For more information, contact the Levinson Law Group at 1-866-643-HURT (4878), or at http://www.LevinsonLawGroup.com

Okay, so you've just become a victim of one of the 3 million car crashes that occur each year in the U.S. This article is going to assume that you were an innocent victim and that another party was at fault. What you do immediately after the collision will have lasting effects on the outcome of your situation.

In a perfect world where everyone is fair and all parties take responsibility for their actions and abide by their agreements, an accident is pretty straight forward: You get hit, the other party gives you their insurance information, you call them, they arrange to repair your vehicle and they offer to pay your medical expenses, any lost time from work and a sum for the time you had to endure pain and were unable to enjoy your life in a normal fashion.

The problem is, it's far from a perfect world. People and insurance corporations do not take personal responsibility and do not uphold their agreements. Therefore, you must take charge and not assume everyone is going to do their share.

What to do immediately after the collision: Take inventory of your body and your passenger's well-being. If anyone is bleeding, have them apply pressure to the wound. If anyone is unconscious, do not move them. Check for pulses and breathing. Immediately call 911. Administer emergency care like CPR if needed. If you have an unconscious passenger, or one that is severely injured or if you are severely injured, try to remain calm until help arrives. Do not move the vehicle or the injured party unless there are signs of a fire or other imminent danger.

If no life threatening or severe injuries have occurred, move your vehicle to the side of the road and out of traffic. It does absolutely no good to get out of your vehicle and inspect damage in traffic lanes. It only causes traffic congestion and other secondary accidents. It won't make any difference legally if all the cars are lined up or not. Just make sure to note which cars were where and the sequence the collision occurred in. Call 911 and report the accident and ask for local police (for surface streets) or Highway patrol (freeways and toll roads) to respond. Many local police agencies will not write a report on scene unless there are injuries, severe vehicle damage or you are blocking traffic because your vehicle won't move.

Once the authorities have been notified, go out and exchange information with the other parties involved. Take a piece of paper and pen with you and write down the name, phone number, make and model of vehicle, color, license plate number and insurance information. DO NOT ARGUE. Don't cause a scene at the scene. Don't insist on an apology or demand the answer to "What were you doing?! Why did you hit me?!" Dispassionately gather information. If you get upset and rant, the other party is less likely to cooperate. If your cell phone has a camera, take pictures of the other vehicle and the damage of your vehicle as they sit at the side of the road. Get photos of all vehicles involved if it is a 3 or more vehicle collision, even if the other vehicles did not hit yours. This information may be needed later to settle any disputes over liability.

Once authorities arrive at the scene, calmly and assertively explain what happened. If you or anyone else in your vehicle feels any discomfort at all, do not be brave and minimize it. Often injuries develop over the course of a few days and can even be delayed by weeks or months. If you report at the scene that you are "fine," and then a week later you awake with severe neck pain or develop a disc injury months later as the result of the crash, these words can come back to be used against you by an insurance company that doesn't want to pay your medical bills. Just tell them honestly, I have a headache, my neck is stiff or my knee hit the dash and it hurts, etc. Don't exaggerate or lie, but do not trivialize your potential injuries either. At the scene you do not know if you are injured. If another party claims incorrectly, you were at fault, do not argue with them. Instead explain your side rationally to the police at the scene. Between your calm statements, photos and the police officer's "BS" detection instincts, the truth almost always prevails.

The authorities may ask if you need an ambulance to take you to the hospital. Here are some examples of when to go to an ER room: dizziness, bleeding, cannot move neck or neck pain is significant immediately after the collision, loss of consciousness or disorientation, suspected leg or arm fractures, drowsiness or slurred speech, numbness, shooting pains or inability to move fingers, hand or arm. These are signs of possible severe injuries or spinal damage and require stabilization and evaluation by an ER physician. The vast majority of life threatening or very serious injuries will be discovered in the ER. But, ER doctors often overlook moderate whiplash and other strain type injuries, so if you are told "you're fine... you're just strained... it will go away in a few days..." that is bad medical advice.

Once all information has been exchanged and the police have taken a report, it is time to carefully leave the scene. Carefully because accidents cause other drivers on the road to seemingly lose their minds and veer right for them like bugs to a light. You don't need another collision! If the police do not respond to make a report. Drive directly to the local police station to make a traffic accident report. This is important! You must do this right way. If no objective authority files a report, it's your word against the other person's. Making a report right away gets your side of the story documented.

Whether you feel pain or not it is important to call and make an appointment with a physician specializing in automobile accident injuries. Such a professional will always make room for you within 24 hours because they understand that immediate evaluation is necessary not only medically, but to protect your legal rights as well. Your family medical doctor or chiropractor who is not specifically trained in and does not devote the majority of his or her practice time in personal injury matters, is not qualified to take care of your unique condition. Accidents are intricate and there are many bases to cover to ensure any injuries are detected, documented fully and cared for correctly. That's where a specialist can help you immensely.

Your next call is to the other persons auto insurance company. Don't put this off until tomorrow. Do it within an hour or so of the accident. Give them all your information and the information given to you by their insured. Inform them you will be seeking a medical evaluation within 24 hours. Next, call your own insurance company and let them know you have been in a collision. Give them all the other party's information.

After the dust has settled, and you've made your calls, try to relax. Take out a pad of paper and write down briefly everything that happened. In time your memory will fade and you may forget about important details. Write them down while they are fresh in your mind. Check your body for any bruising, redness or scrapes on the side of the neck, over the collar bone and chest, which often appear due to contact with your seat belt. Look for bruising on your abdomen where your lap belt is. Check arms and legs for bruises and your head for tenderness. Collisions occur so rapidly that you may not even be aware that you struck your body on the interior of the vehicle or against one of your passengers. Photograph any visible signs of injury from about 3-4 feet away.

Well that about does it. You've done all you can to properly manage the immediate aftermath of your accident. Your next steps are to report to your personal injury specialist physician for an evaluation and to continue contacting the other party's insurance company until they have made a report and given you a claim number.

References:

Gotten N: Survey of one hundred cases of whiplash injury after settlement of litigation. JAMA 162(9):865-867, 1956.

Deans GT, Magalliard JN, Kerr M, Rutherford WH: Neck sprain--a major cause of disability following car accidents. Injury 18:10-12, 1987.

Braaf MM, Rosner S: Symptomatology and treatment of injuries of the neck. NY State J Med 55:237-242, 1955.

Loro MBG-M, Yuste PG, Perez CG, Garcia MTM, Lorenzo AH. Epidemiology of traffic crashes in a general hospital. 43rd Annual Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine. September 20-21, 1999, Barcelona, Spain, 437-438.

Richter M, Otte D, Pohlemann T, Krettek C, Blauth M. Whiplash-type neck distortion in restrained car drivers: frequency, causes and long-term results. European Spine Journal 9:109-117, 2000.

By: Dr Barry L Marks D.C.
Dr. Barry L. Marks, DC...chiropractor, author and lecturer. He is a former Associate Clinical Professor and has been in practice since 1986. He has specialized training in whiplash and brain trauma from auto accidents and vehicle crash reconstruction. His expert opinion is often sought in connection with whiplash and other injuries due to automobile collisions. You may reach Dr. Marks at his Orange, CA office at (714) 938-0575. His articles and ebooks can be found at http://www.drmarks.com and a Free Consumer's Guide, "What You Should Know If You've Been Invovled in an Auto Accident" can be found at drmarks.com/auto_accident_whiplash_treatment.html

Sexual harassment is a legal term which is defined as the unwanted, unwelcome sexual advances of another person. While sexual harassment is never acceptable, it becomes an even larger problem when it occurs in the workplace or at school, and in those environments are the only places laws cover. There are many situations in which sexual harassment can occur, but the following are the most commonly reported.

Facts About Sexual Harassment

The victim does not have to be the opposite sex of the aggressor. Same-sex sexual harassment complaints are receiving more and more attention nationwide. Same-sex harassment is accepted as a valid and punishable form of harassment in the workplace.

A common misconception is that the harasser is typically the supervisor or in some way superior to the harassed. Anyone can be harassed by anyone else that they work with, regardless of their situation or station at the place of employment.The harassment must be unwelcome. A prior relationship between the aggressor and the harassed should not have taken place, or the validity of the claim may be questionable.

The victim is not necessarily the one who was harassed but could, in fact, be anyone who was affected in a negative way. Another office worker who was offended by the conduct or comments of his or her co-workers could in fact file charges against and receive restitution from their company and co-workers.

Two Legally Recognized Forms of Sexual Harassment

There are two legally recognized forms of sexual harassment, quid pro quo and hostile environment sexual harassment.

The most common is Quid Pro Quo, which roughly translated from the Latin means "something for something." This type of harassment occurs when a persons' acceptance or rejection of the sexual advances of another individual determines the victim's economic advancement or job advancement. In proving this type of sexual harassment, the victim needs to demonstrate that there was a threat of economic loss due to the harassment. Putting employees in that situation not only affects those involved with the harassment, but also affects overall job morale and productivity.

Hostile environment sexual harassment happens when unwelcome sexual conduct occurs in the workplace and makes the work environment hostile and demanding. The workplace may involve sexual graffiti, repeated sexual advances or offensive language. While this type of harassment may not result in a tangible loss of job or promotion, the environment of working under this type of sexual harassment has serious implications for the employees' mental health.

By: Joseph Devine
If you have been sexually harassed and would like more information concerning this crime, contact http://www.orangecountyemployment.com for more information and to have all of your questions answered.

Motorcycle accident litigation often involves issues like traffic and registration law compliance, medical expenses, and liability determinations. These are the common elements considered in litigating this sort of accident.

Most states have their own laws regarding traffic and safety in motorcycle riding. These often include the helmet law and other special laws. In California, for instance, motorcycle accident law permits lane splitting, a practice that allow motorcycle riders to pass between cars or vehicles.

In most states, road rules are contained in the vehicle code, which are designed to give drivers a guideline to follow in avoiding accidents. The vehicle code also contains the list of common road violations and their corresponding penalties.

To better understand how claims litigation is done in a motorcycle accident case, it is essential to know, the main issues in question during accidents.

In most motorcycle accident cases, the two main points of contention are:

• the liability between the parties involved

• how to compensate the party not at fault

Liability for causing of the accident

In any vehicle accident, liability means driving into, or striking someone, or some thing, because you were not obeying the rules of the road. Violations of vehicle laws do not necessarily lead to civil liability. To be held liable, the violation must cause or contribute to cause of the accident or injury.

Once liability has been determined based on violation of statute or laws of the road, and the violation resulted in an accident, a lawyer will then analyze the facts and look for any contributing factors.

Comparative fault

The law of comparative fault means each party will pay for their share of the accident that they caused by not following the rules of the road.

Each accident is different and requires first a study of the applicable statutes, then the facts of each accident. It is also important to combine all the investigation with this.

Once liability is established and the amount of comparative fault is determined, then the victim, who is non-negligent or partially negligent, is entitled to damages in accordance with what they did not cause.

Damages in motorcycle accidents are categorized into five main types:

• Property damage - Damage to the motorcycle or vehicle, rental, storage, and personal items lost or destroyed

• Personal injuries - Medical expenses incurred and "substantially" likely to occur

• Wage Loss - Lost income or earning capacity, use of vacation, or sick leave

• Other Miscellaneous - expenses to the doctors, medications, special medical devices, etc

• Pain and Suffering - amount designed to compensate you for pain, your personal suffering, inconvenience, and fear, etc.

In litigation, the client will be working closely with the accident attorney in three areas:

• Interrogatories - These are methods of verifying bills, claims of injury and damages under the so-called 'verification of accuracy'. The client must provide all the information needed in response to the specific questions asked. It is better to be overly accurate than not accurate. He should answer all questions fully.

• Deposition - A deposition gives the defendant the opportunity to evaluate his claims, personality and effectiveness in facing the trial procedures.

• Offers: Offers are money for settlement given by an insurance company. Treat offers as if you are negotiating a business deal. Always communicate your opinion of any offers to your attorney.

Litigation in vehicle accidents often requires the skills of a competent motorcycle accident litigation attorney. A knowledgeable attorney who has litigation experience in motorcycle accidents cases can improve your chances of getting the rightful claim that you deserve.

By: Manuel Salvacion
For an effective approach and pursuance of your motorcycle accident claim, hire the services of our credible litigation attorneys and we pledge to exert all our efforts to win your case. We also provide free case evaluation for our clients.

Before becoming an online writer, Manuel worked as a journalist, a newspaper columnist, a scriptwriter, a fiction writer, a magazine editor, and a tutor. He acquired his legal background as a Senate legislative officer and later on, as a researcher and paralegal staff in various law offices. Someday he hoped to go back and devote more time to writing fiction, which is his first passion.

In a recent decision, a California Court of Appeals faced the challenge of applying the California Labor Code to an incentive compensation plan adopted by an employer for its employees. In his lawsuit, an employee who quit his employment with a financial brokerage company, claimed that the forfeiture provisions of the employer's incentive compensation plan violated the Labor Code, and that the enforcement of these forfeiture provisions against the employee who quit before vesting, constituted conversion of the wages he had earned.

In this case, the employer established an incentive compensation plan which allowed participating employees the option of using a portion of their annual earnings to purchase shares of stock in the employer's parent company at a price below the stock's publicly traded market price. Under the plan, if the participating employee resigned or was terminated for cause within a two-year vesting period, the employee forfeited the stock as well as the money used to purchase the stock.

In this case, prior to the completion of the two-year period, the employee voluntarily terminated his employment with the company, and consequently forfeited 82 shares of restricted stock, as well as the money used to purchase those shares.

A California Court of Appeals found that, as a matter of economic reality, employees who elected to participate in the stock-purchase program were paid all the wages the employees designated to invest in company stock. While the employee was not paid directly, that money was used to purchase the restricted stock. Those funds were deducted from the employee's pay for the purpose of purchasing stock, pursuant to the employee's request and at his explicit authorization. The Court ruled that such a deduction was lawful under the Labor Code.

The Court found that even if the employee was paid in part in shares of restricted stock, rather than cash, the plan's forfeiture provisions were lawful. Even if the Court accepted the employee's contention that he was never paid his wages, either in cash or in the form of shares of restricted stock, his claim of unlawful forfeiture of earned wages would still be rejected because the employee could not show that the funds used to purchase the shares were actually earned. The Court ruled that there was no unlawful forfeiture of earned wages because either the employee was paid all his compensation, either directly or indirectly through a deduction that he requested and expressly authorized, or he did not earn the shares or the money used to purchase the shares because he left the employer prior to the two-year period required for vesting under the plan.

By: Russell Thomas
Attorney at Law
THOMAS & ASSOCIATES
2172 Dupont Drive, Suite 203
Irvine, California 92612;
Tel: (949) 752-0101
Fax: (949) 257-4756
Email: rthomas@rjtlawfirm.com
Web: http://www.rjtlawfirm.com

J.D., Harvard Law School, 1967

Specializes in Employment Law and Litigation;
Offices in Southern California (Los Angeles and Orange County)