Summary Judgment In Favor Of Holding Company Reversed; Trier Of Fact May Infer It Is An Employer.

A plaintiff filed a class action on behalf of himself and other certified nursing assistants for unpaid minimum wages and overtime wages. He contends defendant, a holding company with no employees, is the alter ego of a nursing facility where he worked and its “corporate veil should be pierced.” The trial court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment, after defendant said it had no control over the nursing home or its employees. In reversing, the appellate court noted there was evidence the holding company has more than a contractual relationship with the nursing facility, in that it owns the nursing facility, having purchased it in 2009 and that it owns all of its stock. The court stated that a trier of fact could infer this evidence refutes the holding company’s claims of lack of control and responsibility. The court also noted the basis for liability is the owner’s failure to perform the duty of seeing to it that the prohibited condition does not exist. The court held: “A corporation with no employees owns a corporation with employees. If the corporation with no employees exercises some control over the corporation with employees, it also may be the employer of the employees of the corporation it owns.” (Castaneda v. The Ensign Group, Inc. (Cal. App. Second Dist., Div. 6; September 15, 2014) 229 Cal.App.4th 1015, [177 Cal.Rptr.3d 581].)