Procedural Posture

Appellant organization sought review of an order of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County (California), which awarded summary judgment to respondent corporation, and found that respondent had not committed unlawful and unfair business practices. Respondent also sought review of an order that denied attorney’s fees.

California Business Lawyer & Corporate Lawyer, Inc. employs Business Attorneys Orange County

Overview

Respondent firm was based in India, and sent computer engineers from India to California to work on projects with respondent corporation. Respondent firm made the engineers sign agreements that called for unspecified liquidated damages against the engineers should they leave their position before the project was completed, or fail to return to India to work for respondent firm. Appellant organization filed an action against respondent firm and respondent corporation, which alleged that respondents had committed or conspired to commit unlawful and unfair business practices, based on these agreements. The trial court found for respondent firm and granted summary judgment to respondent corporation. Appellant sought review of both judgments. The court affirmed and held that appellant and respondent firm did not violate Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17209, that the liquidated damages clause was not unfair under Cal. Civ. Code § 1671, that appellant waived review of violations of the California Labor Code by failing to preserve the issue at the trial level, that appellant failed to meet the burden of proving unfair business practices, and that the trial court properly denied attorney’s fees.

Outcome

The court affirmed and held that appellant failed to meet the burden of proving unfair business practices, that the liquidated damages clause was not unfair, that appellant waived review of violations of the California Labor Code by failing to preserve the issue at the trial level, and that the trial court properly denied attorney’s fees.