Vasquez v. Franklin Management Real Estate Fund, Inc.
222 Cal. App. 4th 819
Cal. Ct. App.2013Background
- Vasquez, a maintenance technician, sued Franklin Management for unpaid mileage reimbursements and alleged constructive discharge and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
- Allegations: Vasquez drove his own vehicle for work duties—minimum 30 miles daily—without reimbursement; his wage was $10/hour, creating substantial unreimbursed expenses.
- Trial court sustained demurrers to claims of constructive discharge and IIED; leave to amend granted for constructive discharge but not IIED.
- FAC/oppose demurrer argued that unreimbursed mileage made his effective wage below the minimum and rendered working conditions intolerable.
- Court analyzed whether failure to reimburse and extensive driving could state a constructive-discharge claim: relying on Turner and public-policy wage violations under Labor Code sections 2802 and 1194.
- Court reversed in part: held the minimum-wage public-policy basis could support a constructive-discharge claim and remanded for further proceedings; IIED claim affirmed as rightly demurred.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether failure to reimburse mileage can support construct-discharge | Vasquez argues unpaid mileage created intolerable conditions forcing resignation. | Franklin contends wage issues do not establish constructive discharge. | Constructive-discharge claim viable; remanded for further proceedings. |
| Whether minimum wage public-policy basis supports constructive discharge | Minimum wage deficiency due to unreimbursed mileage implicates public policy. | Public policy not tied to private wage issues. | Yes; minimum wage public policy supports claim; remand allowed. |
| Whether the alleged failure to reimburse constitutes outrageous conduct supporting IIED | Defendant’s mileage policy caused severe distress by ongoing denials. | Economic disputes and wage issues don't meet outrageousness standard. | IIED claim properly dismissed without leave to amend. |
Key Cases Cited
- Turner v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 7 Cal.4th 1238 (1994) (constructive discharge standard; intolerable conditions test)
- Gould v. Maryland Sound Industries, Inc., 31 Cal.App.4th 1137 (1995) (fundamental public policy on wage payments; overtime/public wages)
- Phillips v. Gemini Moving Specialists, 63 Cal.App.4th 563 (1998) (fundamental public policy protecting wages; timely payment)
- Gantt v. Sentry Insurance, 1 Cal.4th 1083 (1992) (public policy wrongful discharge framework)
- Foley v. Interactive Data Corp., 47 Cal.3d 654 (1988) (firm public policy basis for wrongful discharge)
- Miklosy v. Regents of University of California, 44 Cal.4th 876 (2008) (workplace injuries; workers' compensation exclusivity)
- Scotch v. Art Institute of California, 173 Cal.App.4th 986 (2009) (constructive-discharge framework; role of intolerable conditions)