Almundai
v. Dealer Services Corp.













Filed 10/5/10 Almundai v. Dealer Services Corp. CA6









NOT
TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS





California
Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or
relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except
as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This
opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for
purposes of rule 8.1115.





IN
THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA



SIXTH
APPELLATE DISTRICT




>

KEVIN ALMUDAI, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. DEALER SERVICES CORPORTION, Defendant and Respondent.

H034971 (Santa Clara County Super.Ct.No. CV110703)

Kevin
Almudai worked for Dealer Services Corporation (DSC) as the manager of its San
Jose branch office, which opened in mid-2006. DSC's business is borrowing money from large
financial institutions and, in turn, lending it to car dealers for the purchase
of inventory, which secures the loans.
Almudai contends that DSC failed to pay him incentive branch bonuses
owed to him for the calendar years 2006 and 2007. DSC bonuses are paid according to a company
bonus plan, as generally described in written documents provided to Almudai in
2006 and 2007. The plan contemplates
applying certain formulas for determining whether a branch bonus is due for a
given year and, if so, its amount. But
in order for a manager to be eligible for a branch bonus in any year, the
branch had to meet 80 percent of its annual earnings goal, as adjusted, and the
loan write-offs attributed to that branch had to total less than four percent
of the branch's average accounts receivable over the calendar year.

Almudai did
not receive a branch performance bonus for 2006 but he continued working for DSC. After he did not receive a branch performance
bonus for 2007, he quit his job, effective January 31, 2008, because he felt he was entitled to a
bonus. He then filed a complaint against
DSC, alleging in three causes of action that it had failed to timely pay him
wages owed in the form of bonuses for 2006 and 2007 under Labor Code section
202, that DSC's failure to pay was willful so that waiting time penalties
attached under Labor Code section 203, and for an accounting. DSC moved for summary judgment, contending that for
2006, the San Jose branch did not
meet 80 percent of its adjusted budget target and for 2007, that its write-offs
were over four percent of its average accounts receivable, such that Almudai
was not eligible for a branch performance bonus in either year.

The trial
court granted DSC's motion. Almudai
appeals from the judgment, reprising his contentions raised in opposition to
the motion below, all of which relate to factors affecting various formulations
for calculating whether bonuses were due in 2006 and 2007 under the plan. Although Almudai contends that he was
entitled to bonuses for 2006 and 2007 based on how the bonus formulations
should have been fairly calculated, he points to no evidence that shows the
existence of a triable issue of material fact on the issue whether the bonuses
were due and to no particular provision of the bonus plan that DSC allegedly
breached or that should have been construed differently so as to entitle him to
a bonus for either year. We accordingly
affirm.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

I. Factual
Background[1]

DSC is an
Indiana Corporation whose nationwide business involves borrowing money from
large institutional lenders and in turn lending money to car dealers in order
to finance their purchase of inventory, which serves as collateral for the
loans. DSC maintained a branch office in
Los Angeles, which at that point
had generated some existing accounts in northern California. In early 2006, DSC opened its first California
branch office north of Los Angeles,
in Fresno.

In June
2006, DSC, through Jason Cook, a company regional vice-president, hired Almudai
as an Area Manager in the northern California
market. He was to open a DSC branch in San
Jose and expand business in the surrounding area. The parties signed a Letter of Intent, which
provided that Almudai's starting base salary was to be $80,000 and that he, as
an Area Manager, would be afforded the opportunity to participate in the
company's bonus compensation program.
According to the written â€