Summaries of Published Opinions
| Publication year | 2022 |
| Pages | 88 |
FROM THE COURTS COLORADO SUPREME COURT
May 16, 2022
2022 CO 20. No. 20SC565. French v. Centura Health Corp. Contracts—Incorporation by Reference—Amount of Compensation and Value of Services.
In this case, the Supreme Court considered whether a hospital's chargemaster, a database that lists rates for specific medical services and supplies, was incorporated by reference into hospital services agreements that a patient had signed. The Court concluded that because the patient neither had knowledge of nor assented to the chargemaster, which was not referenced in the hospital services agreements or disclosed to her, the chargemaster was not incorporated by reference into the hospital services agreements. Accordingly, the hospital services agreements left the price term open, and the jury appropriately determined that term.
The Court reversed the judgment of the division below.
2022 CO 21. No. 20SC950. Gomez v.JP Trucking, Inc. Interstate Drivers—Overtime Compensation—Overtime Exemption—Colorado Minimum Wage Order, 7 Colo. Code Regs. 1103-1 —Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 USC §§ 201 -209—Motor Carrier Act Exemption, 29 USC § 213(b)(1).
In this case, the Supreme Court considered whether four commercial truck drivers were entitled to overtime pay from their former employer, JP Trucking, Inc., for hours they worked exceeding 40 hours per week or 12 hours per day. A state regulation in effect during the relevant timeframe (i.e., throughout 2015), Colorado Minimum Wage Order 31, contains a provision exempting "interstate drivers" from overtime compensation (the Wage Order 31 exemption). The Court held that the term "interstate drivers" in the Wage Order 31 exemption refers to drivers whose work takes them across state lines, regardless of how often. Therefore, the Wage Order 31 exemption is triggered the first time a driver crosses state lines during a work trip.
Here, two of the four truck drivers did not cross state lines during a work trip. Consequently, they do not come within the scope of "interstate drivers" in the Wage Order 31 exemption and were entitled to overtime compensation. But the other two drivers each crossed state lines during a work trip, which rendered them "interstate drivers" under the Wage 31 exemption and thus ineligible for overtime compensation. The fact that these two drivers crossed state lines on only one...
To continue reading
Request your trial