Expert Testimony on Wage and Hour Issues Admitted
Posted on May 23, 2025 by Expert Witness Profiler
George Huerta filed a wage and hour class action based on his work at the California Flats Solar Project in Monterey County. First Solar, Inc., the project owner, hired CSI Electrical Contractors, Inc. (“CSI”) to manage Phase 2 construction. CSI employed a large workforce, including subcontracted labor from Milco National Constructors. Huerta worked on-site from June 13 to July 10, 2018, as a Milco employee reporting to CSI.
Workers accessed the site through a guarded entrance and drove several miles to the Phase 2 Security Gate for badge scanning. At day’s end, they scanned out, sometimes waiting up to 20 minutes in vehicle lines.
Basically, Huerta claimed this waiting time and allegedly restricted meal breaks were compensable under California law, arguing CSI retained control during breaks. However, CSI countered that employees were properly compensated and free to use break time as they wished.
Therefore, CSI retained an expert witness Keith Mendes, who reviewed records and concluded Huerta and others were fully paid, including for badge-out delays. Huerta challenged Mendes’ declaration on wage issues and damages.
Wage and Hour Expert Witness
Keith Mendes has consulted in matters involving intellectual property, valuations, wage and hour class claims, issues related to wrongful terminations, business interruption, and calculation of complex damages. Mendes has been published and submitted an expert report regarding the determination of the appropriate “cram-down” interest rate in a bankruptcy setting. He also has testimony experience at both deposition and trial.
Discussion by the Court
In assessing the parties’ arguments, the Court focused on whether CSI complied with wage and hour laws in compensating Huerta for all work performed, particularly regarding badge-out wait time and meal breaks.
Huerta argued these periods were compensable, claiming CSI maintained control over employees during both. He challenged the credibility of CSI’s expert, Keith Mendes, criticizing his reliance on timesheets, invoices, and interviews instead of payroll records. Huerta further contended that Mendes’ analysis was based on unfounded assumptions and inadmissible hearsay.
The Court rejected these objections, finding Mendes’ testimony admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 702. It held that experts may rely on otherwise inadmissible materials if properly applied within their field, and that challenges to Mendes’ assumptions affected the weight, not admissibility, of his opinion.
As a result, the Court found Mendes’ analysis credibly showed CSI complied with wage laws, including pay for badge-out delays, and saw no evidence that meal breaks were unduly restricted.
Held
The Court overruled Huerta’s objections to Keith Mendes’ opinions.
Key Takeaway:
In this case, Huerta has not presented the opinion of his own expert, or any other evidence, from which this Court could conclude that reliance on timesheets and billing invoices, and any assumptions made in calculating wages, render Mendes’ methodology unreliable.
Case Details
| Case Caption: | Huerta V. CSI Elec. Contrs., Inc. |
| Docket Number: | 5:18cv6761 |
| Court Name: | United States District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division |
| Order Date: | May 14, 2025 |
