Sullivan, et al. v. Oracle Corp., et al., No. 06-56649 (9th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseThree nonresidents of California brought a would-be class action against Oracle seeking damages under California law for failure to pay overtime. Plaintiffs' first two claims were based on work performed in California. The third claim was based on work performed anywhere in the United States. The district court granted summary judgment to Oracle on all three claims, on the ground that the relevant provisions of California law did not, or could not, apply to the work performed by plaintiffs. After certifying several questions of state law to the California Supreme Court and receiving answers from that court, the court reversed summary judgment on the first two claims and affirmed the third claim. In regards to the Labor Code claim, the court rejected Oracle's due process clause and commerce clause arguments; in regards to the California Business and Professions Code 17200 claim, the court held that the California court's holding was conclusive (that section 17200 did not apply to overtime work performed by plaintiffs); and in regards to the Fair Labor Standard Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. 213(a)(1), claim, the court held that the California court's holding was conclusive (section 17200 did not apply to overtime work performed outside California for a California-based employer by out-of-state plaintiffs based solely on the employer's failure to comply with the overtime provisions of the FLSA).
This opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on November 6, 2008.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.