In Combs v. Skyriver Communications, Inc. (2008) 159 Cal.App.4th 1242, the trial court found that the plaintiff was an exempt employee, and the reviewing court affirmed the judgment.
The Good Nite Inns stress that in Combs the plaintiff's resume indicated that his job duties were the type that were exempt (id. at p. 1247).
At trial, the plaintiff in Combs acknowledged that his resume was accurate. (Combs, supra, 159 Cal.App.4th at p. 1247.)
He testified that his "'core'" responsibility was "'maintaining the well-being of the network,' and he spent 60 percent to 70 percent of his time carrying out that responsibility." (Ibid.)
The plaintiff called a number of witnesses who confirmed that the plaintiff's resume was accurate. (Id. at pp. 1247-1248.)
The plaintiff's own testimony and the documentary exhibits also showed that the plaintiff was "responsible for maintaining, developing and improving the employer's network, and his duties involved high-level problem solving and 'troubleshooting'; preparing reports for the employer's board of directors; capacity and expansion planning; planning to integrate acquired networks into employer's network; lease negotiations; and equipment sourcing and purchasing." (Id. at p. 1248.)