Wang v. Ehang Holdings Limited

Background

With the court’s permission, Gary Wang filed a third amended complaint alleging that Huazhi Hu was his joint employer. Wang added Hu as a defendant to Claim 3, which alleges violations of California Labor Code sections 201 and 203. Section 201 concerns payment of wages when employment ends, and section 203 concerns waiting-time penalties; the opinion does not provide further factual detail about those allegations.

Issue

At a jury-instruction conference, the court requested additional briefing about whether a corporate officer could potentially be liable as a joint employer. The relevant legal standard was the definition of “employer” in Martinez v. Combs. Although Martinez addressed a claim under California Labor Code section 1194, the court noted that California courts and district courts in the Ninth Circuit have applied that definition to section 203 claims as well.

Ruling and reasoning

The court confirmed that Wang may proceed on his joint-employer theory under Martinez. Martinez states that the definition of employer does not impose liability on individual corporate agents acting within the scope of their agency. But the court also cited authority stating that an individual’s status as a shareholder and officer does not insulate the individual from joint-employer liability if the individual’s actions satisfy any of Martinez’s three definitions. The order decides that the theory may go forward; it does not determine whether Huazhi Hu ultimately meets one of those definitions or is liable.

Disposition

The court confirmed that Plaintiff may proceed on the joint-employer theory. The opinion does not state a separate disposition of the underlying claim or a final determination of liability.