In Patterson v. Domino’s Pizza, LLC., the California Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether a franchisor, such as Domino’s Pizza, LLC., can be held vicariously liable for claims of alleged sexual harassment by an employee of a franchisee, such as an individually owned Domino’s Pizza store. The court framed the issue as follows: “Does a franchisor stand in an employment or agency relationship with the franchisee and its employees for purposes of holding it vicariously liable for workplace injuries allegedly inflicted by one employee of a franchisee while supervising another employee of the franchisee?” The court held a franchisor is not vicariously liable for claims of alleged workplace torts by employees of a franchisee unless. . . .
Taylor Paterson filed suit against Domino’s Pizza, LLC., the franchisee, and the employee of the franchisee who allegedly sexually harassed her, alleging violations of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), which prohibits workplace sexual harassment and requires employers to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment from occurring in the workplace. Paterson alleged Domino’s Pizza, LLC., was liable as an alleged “employer” of her and of the alleged harasser and alleged the Domino’s Pizza, LLC., was liable on the additional ground the franchisee was the agent of Domino’s Pizza, LLC.
The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Domino’s Pizza, LLC., finding, as a matter of law, that Domino’s Pizza, LLC., was not an employer of Taylor or her alleged harasser and that the franchisee was not an agent of Domino’s Pizza, LLC.
On Appeal, the California Court of Appeal reversed the decision of the trial court and held the trial court should not have granted summary judgment because, according to the Court of Appeal, a jury could reasonably infer that Domino’s Pizza, LLC., exercised sufficient control over the operations of the franchisee to be deemed an “employer” of Taylor and of the alleged harasser and/or that the franchisee was an agent of Domino’s Pizza, LLC.
The California Supreme Court granted Domino’s Pizza, LLC’s petition for review of the Court of Appeal’s decision.
The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Court of Appeal and held, consistent with the decision of the trial court, that Domino’s Pizza was entitled to summary judgment in its favor because the undisputed facts showed that the franchisee and not Domino’s Pizza, LLC., “made day-to-day decisions involving the hiring, supervision, and discipline of his employees.” The Court explained, “[t]he contract-based operational division that otherwise exists between the franchisor and the franchisee would be violated by holding the franchisor accountable for misdeeds committed by employees who are under the direct supervision of the franchisee, and over whom the franchisor has no contractual or operational control.” The Court further explained, “It follows that potential liability [for alleged FEHA violations] requires that the franchisor exhibit the traditionally understood characteristics of an ‘employer’ or ‘principal,’ i.e., it has retained or assumed a general right of control over factors such as hiring, direction, supervision, discipline, discharge, and relevant day-to-day aspects of the workplace behavior of the franchisee’s employees.” Although Domino’s Pizza, LLC., required each of its franchisees to conform to detailed operational standards, those standards did not govern hiring, firing, supervision, training, or discipline of franchisee employees, and Domino’s Pizza, LLC., did not otherwise exercise or attempt to exercise control over such personnel matters.
Obligations related to alleged joint employer liability can arise for franchisors and franchisees not only from alleged FEHA violations, but also from claims of alleged wage and hour violations and other employment related claims. In those instances, franchisors and franchisees are reminded to consult their franchise agreements.
- Partner
Christopher Andre is a seasoned civil litigator who focuses his practice on civil litigation and advising and representing employers. Mr. Andre is an editor of and frequent contributor to the firm’s Labor and Employment Law ...
- Partner
Scott Dauscher is Chair of the firm’s Commercial and Complex Litigation Practice Group. He also serves as Chair of the firm’s Class Action Defense Group, managing AALRR’s extensive class action practice and its team of ...
Other AALRR Blogs
Recent Posts
- California Supreme Court Prohibits Employee’s Lawsuit Against Payroll Provider for Inaccurate Pay Stubs
- Golden Years: California Rolls Out CalSavers Program to Boost Employee Retirement Savings
- Courts and Legislature Have Worked to “Defang” the Effectiveness of Section 998 Offers
- Safety First: California Legislation Provides Collective Bargaining Agreement Carve Out for Petroleum Facility Workers in Safety-Sensitive Positions for Rest Periods
- Cal/OSHA Issues Advisory on Worker Safety for Regions with Wildfire Smoke
- Voters Approve Proposition 11 Addressing Meal and Rest Periods for Emergency Ambulance Employees
- Governor Brown Signs AB 1654 Exempting Union Contractors from PAGA
- Following Dynamex, California Court of Appeal Applies Stringent ABC Test to Wage Order Claims and Confirms Borello Still Applies to Non-Wage Order Claims
- Parsing Piece Rate: California Appellate Court Validates Certified Tire’s Compensation System
- Ninth Circuit Requires Individual Arbitration of Uber Drivers' Claims
Popular Categories
- (103)
- (35)
- (18)
- (14)
- (33)
- (13)
- (25)
- (12)
- (2)
- (9)
- (14)
- (2)
- (1)
- (1)
- (3)
- (2)
- (1)
- (3)
- (2)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
- (1)
Contributors
- Christopher S. Andre
- Cindy Strom Arellano
- William M. Betley
- Michele L. Collender
- Kevin R. Dale
- Scott K. Dauscher
- Alexandria M. Davidson
- William A. Diedrich
- Alfonso Estrada
- Cathie L. Fields
- Paul S. Fleck
- Robert Fried
- L. Brent Garrett
- Carol A. Gefis
- Amber S. Healy
- Jonathan Judge
- Nate J. Kowalski
- Thomas A. Lenz
- David M. Lester
- Martin S. Li
- Elizabeth P. Lind
- Mia A. Lomedico
- Jorge J. Luna
- Ronald W. Novotny
- Aaron V. O'Donnell
- Shawn M. Ogle
- Sharon J. Ormond
- Chesley D. Quaide
- Todd M. Robbins
- Irma Rodríguez Moisa
- Allison M. Scott
- Casandra P. Secord
- Jon M. Setoguchi
- Amber M. Solano
- Susan M. Steward
- April Szabo
- Jay G. Trinnaman
- Jonathan S. Vick
- Robert L. Wenzel
- Timothy M. Wojcik
- Lisa C. Zaradich
Archives
2019
2018
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
2017
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
2016
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
2015
- December 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
2011
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011