>MORGAN v.
UNITED RETAIL INCORPORATED



















Filed 6/23/10;
pub. order 7/19/10
(see end of opn.)

>







IN
THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA



SECOND
APPELLATE DISTRICT



DIVISION
SEVEN




>

AMBER MORGAN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. UNITED RETAIL INCORPORATED, Defendant and Respondent.

B216130 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC362191)

APPEAL from
a judgment of the Superior Court
of Los Angeles
County. Ruth A. Kwan, Judge. Affirmed.

Initiative
Legal Group, Marc Primo, Matthew T. Theriault, Dina S. Livhits and Jennifer
Grock for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Sheppard,
Mullin, Richter & Hampton, Charles F. Barker and Ross A. Boughton for
Defendant and Respondent.



_______________________
clear=all >

Appellant Amber Morgan (Morgan)
filed a class action lawsuit against her former employer, respondent United
Retail Incorporated (United Retail), for violation of Labor Code section 226.[1] On behalf of a class of current and former
non-exempt employees, Morgan alleged that United Retail's wage statements
failed to comply with section 226, subdivision (a) because they listed the
total number of regular hours and the total number of overtime hours worked by
the employee, but did not list the sum of the regular and overtime hours worked
in a separate line. The trial court
granted summary adjudication in favor
of United Retail on the section 226 claim.
We conclude that the trial court properly granted summary adjudication
because United Retail's wage statements complied with the statutory
requirements of section 226 by â€